Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement ‘mosaic management’ of agriculture We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of implementing mosaic management in agricultural systems. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1729https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1729Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:08:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/create habitat corridors in farmed areas One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation, in habitat patches or within corridors, of retaining or creating habitat corridors in farmed areas.This study was in a tropical peat swamp. Vegetation structure (1 study): One study in Indonesia found that a peat swamp forest corridor contained 5,819 trees/ha. This included 331 large trees/ha, 1,360 saplings/ha and 4,128 seedlings/ha. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study recorded 18–29 tree species in the peat swamp forest corridor (the number of species depending on the size class). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1730https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1730Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:09:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut/remove/thin forest plantations Four studies evaluated the effect on peatland vegetation of cutting/removing forest plantations: one in bogs and three in fens. The studies in the fens were all based, at least in part, on the same experimental set-up. Herb cover (3 studies): Three replicated studies (two also paired and controlled) in bogs in the UK and fens in Sweden reported that tree removal increased cover of some herb species including cottongrasses and sedges. One of the studies reported no effect of tree removal on other herb species. Moss cover (3 studies): One replicated, paired, controlled study in bogs in the UK reported that tree removal reduced cover of forest-characteristic mosses. One replicated before-and-after study in a drained rich fen in Sweden reported that Sphagnum moss cover decreased over three years following tree removal. However, one replicated, paired, controlled study in partly rewetted rich fens reported that Sphagnum cover increased over eight years following tree removal. Overall plant richness/diversity (2 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled studies in rich fens in Sweden reported that tree removal increased total plant species richness. However, one of these studies reported a much smaller effect of tree removal in rewetted plots than in drained plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1731https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1731Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:16:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut/remove/thin forest plantations and rewet peat Eleven studies evaluated the effects of cutting/removing trees and rewetting peat (in combination): six in fens, two in bogs, and three in both fens and bogs. In four of the studies, the peatlands naturally contained some trees. Three studies were based on one experimental set-up, and two studies were based on another. Plant community composition (5 studies): Of three replicated studies in fens, two in Finland found that removing trees/rewetting had no effect on the overall plant community composition whilst one in Sweden reported only a small effect. Two site comparison studies in bogs and fens in Finland found that removing trees/rewetting changed the overall plant community composition. It became less like sites that remained drained and forested. Characteristic plants (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies (one site comparison, one controlled) in bogs and fens in Finland and Sweden reported that removing trees/rewetting increased the abundance of wetland-characteristic plants. Moss cover (6 studies): Of five studies that examined the effect of removing trees/rewetting on Sphagnum moss, two replicated, paired studies in bogs and fens in Sweden and Finland found that the intervention increased Sphagnum cover. One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in forested fens in Finland found no effect. Two before-and-after studies in a bog in Finland and a fen in Sweden found mixed effects depending on site or species. Additionally, three studies (two replicated and paired) in peatlands in the UK and Finland found that removing trees/rewetting reduced cover of non-Sphagnum or forest-characteristic mosses. However, one replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in forested fens in Finland found no effect of thinning trees/rewetting on forest mosses. Herb cover (7 studies): Seven studies (including two replicated, paired, controlled) in bogs and fens in the UK, Finland and Sweden reported that removing trees/rewetting increased cover of at least one group of herbs, including cottongrasses and sedges. However, one of these studies reported loss of cottongrass from a fen where it was rare before intervention, along with reduced purple moor grass cover. Vegetation structure (4 studies): One replicated site comparison study in a bog in the UK found that removing trees/rewetting increased ground vegetation height. One replicated, paired, controlled study in a fen in Sweden reported that removing trees/rewetting had no effect on canopy height after eight years. Two replicated, paired, site comparison studies in bogs and fens in Finland found that thinning trees/rewetting reduced the number of tall trees present for 1–3 years (although not to the level of natural peatlands). Overall plant richness/diversity (4 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled studies in rich fens in Sweden reported that removing trees/rewetting increased plant species richness. However, two replicated studies in fens in Finland found that removing trees/rewetting had no effect on total plant species richness or diversity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1732https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1732Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:16:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use barriers to keep livestock off ungrazed peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of using barriers to keep livestock off peatlands that have never (or not recently) been grazed. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1733https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1733Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:20:39 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude or remove livestock from degraded peatlands Ten studies evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of excluding or removing livestock from degraded peatlands. Seven studies were in bogs, two in fens and one in an unspecified peatland. Three studies were based on the same experimental set-up in the UK. Plant community composition (2 studies): Of two replicated, paired, controlled studies in bogs in the UK, one found that excluding sheep had no effect on the development of the plant community. The other found no effect in wetter areas of the bog, but that in drier areas excluding sheep favoured dry moorland plants. Herb cover (9 studies): Seven studies (including six replicated, paired, controlled) in bogs in the UK and Australia and fens in the USA found that excluding or removing livestock typically had no effect on cover of key herb groups. Five of five studies found that excluding livestock typically had no effect on cottongrass cover. Two of two studies reported no effect on sedge cover. However, one before-and-after study in a poor fen in Spain reported that rush cover increased after cattle were excluded (along with other interventions). One site comparison study in Chile found that excluding livestock (along with other interventions) increased overall herb cover, but one replicated, paired, controlled study in bogs in Australia found that excluding livestock had no effect on overall herb cover. Moss cover (6 studies): Five replicated, paired, controlled studies in bogs in the UK and Australia found that excluding livestock typically had no effect on Sphagnum moss cover. Responses sometimes varied between species and sites. Three of the studies in the UK also found no effect on cover of other mosses. One before-and-after study in a poor fen in Spain reported that Sphagnum moss appeared after excluding cattle (and rewetting). Tree/shrub cover (8 studies): Four replicated, paired, controlled studies in bogs in the UK and Australia found that excluding livestock had no effect on shrub cover (specifically heather or a heathland community). One replicated, paired, controlled study in a bog in the UK found that excluding sheep had no effect on heather cover in wetter areas, but increased heather cover in drier areas. Three studies (including two site comparisons) in bogs in the UK, fens in the USA and a peatland in Chile found that excluding or removing livestock increased shrub cover. Vegetation structure (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a bog in the UK found that excluding sheep increased total vegetation, shrub and bryophyte biomass but had no effect on biomass of grass-like herbs. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1734https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1734Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:21:00 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce intensity of livestock grazing One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of reducing livestock grazing intensity. This study was in bogs. Vegetation cover (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in bogs in the UK found that total vegetation and shrub cover were greater where grazing intensity was lower. Cottongrass cover was greater where grazing intensity was lower (one species) or unaffected by grazing intensity (one species). Vegetation structure (1 study): The same study found that vegetation biomass was higher where grazing intensity was lower. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1735https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1735Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:21:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change type of livestock We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of changing livestock type. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1736https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1736Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:21:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of livestock grazing We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of changing the season or timing of livestock grazing. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1737https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1737Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:22:33 +0000