Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Transplant/release captive-bred or hatchery-reared species - Transplant/release crustaceans Five studies examined the effects of transplanting or releasing hatchery-reared crustacean species on their wild populations. Four examined lobsters in the North Sea (Germany, Norway, UK), and one examined prawns in the Swan-Canning Estuary (Australia). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Crustacean abundance (1 study): One study in the Swan-Canning Estuary found that after releasing hatchery-reared prawn larvae into the wild, the abundance of egg-bearing female prawns increased. Crustacean reproductive success (3 studies): Two studies (one controlled) in the North Sea found that after their release, recaptured hatchery-reared female lobsters carried eggs, and the number, size and developmental stage of eggs were similar to that of wild females. One study in the Swan-Canning Estuary found that after releasing hatchery-reared prawn larvae into the wild the overall population fecundity (egg production/area) increased. Crustacean survival (2 studies): Two studies in the North Sea found that 50–84% and 32–39% of hatchery-reared lobsters survived in the wild after release, up to eight and up to five years, respectively. Crustacean condition (4 studies): Two studies in the North Sea found that hatchery-reared lobsters grew in the wild after release. One controlled study in the North Sea found that after release into the wild, hatchery-reared female lobsters had similar growth rates as wild females. One study in the North Sea found that after releasing hatchery-reared lobsters, no recaptured lobsters displayed signs of “Black Spot” disease, and 95% had developed a crusher-claw. One study in the Swan-Canning Estuary found that after releasing hatchery-reared prawn larvae into the wild, the size of egg-bearing female prawns increased. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Crustacean movement (1 study): One controlled study in the North Sea found that after release into the wild, hatchery-reared female lobsters had similar movement patterns as wild females. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2266https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2266Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:11:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Transplant/release captive-bred or hatchery-reared species - Transplant/release molluscs Eight studies examined the effects of transplanting or releasing hatchery-reared mollusc species on their wild populations. One examined abalone in the North Pacific Ocean (Canada), one examined clams off the Strait of Singapore (Singapore), one examined oysters in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA), and four examined scallops in the North Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Mollusc abundance (2 studies): One replicated, before-and-after study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that after transplanting hatchery-reared scallops, abundance of juvenile scallops typically increased, but not that of adult scallops. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies in the North Atlantic Ocean, found that after releasing hatchery-reared oyster larvae, more spat initially settled using a direct technique compared to a traditional remote technique, and equal number of spat settled on cleaned and natural oyster shells. Mollusc reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that after transplanting hatchery-reared scallops, larval recruitment increased across all areas studied. Mollusc survival (5 studies): One replicated study in the Strait of Singapore found that, after transplantation in the field, aquarium-reared clams had a high survival rate. One replicated, controlled study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that after transplanting hatchery-reared scallops, the number of transplanted scallops surviving decreased regardless of the methods used, and maximum mortalities was reported to be 0–1.5%. One replicated, controlled study in the North Pacific Ocean found that transplanting hatchery-reared abalone into the wild reduced survivorship compared to non-transplanted hatchery-reared abalone kept in tanks. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies in the North Atlantic Ocean found that after releasing hatchery-reared oyster larvae, 61% of the settled spat survived the winter, and settled spat survived equally on cleaned and natural oyster shells. Mollusc condition (3 studies): Two replicated studies in the Strait of Singapore and the North Atlantic Ocean found after transplantation in the wild, aquarium-reared clams and hatchery-reared scallops increased in weight and/or grew. Scallops grew in both free-planted plots and suspended bags but grew more in free-planted plots. One replicated, before-and-after study in the Gulf of Mexico found that after transplanting hatchery-reared scallops, wild populations had not become genetically more similar to hatchery-reared scallops. One replicated, controlled study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that after transplanting hatchery-reared scallops, free-planted scallops developed less shell biofouling than suspended scallops. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2267https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2267Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:16:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Transplant/release captive-bred or hatchery-reared species in predator exclusion cages One study examined the effects of transplanting or releasing hatchery-reared species in predator exclusion cages on their wild populations. The study was in the North Pacific Ocean (Canada). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled study the North Pacific Ocean found that hatchery-reared abalone transplanted in predator exclusion cages had similar survivorship following release compared to those transplanted directly onto the seabed. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2268https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2268Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:32:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate species - Translocate molluscs Nine studies examined the effects of translocating mollusc species on their wild populations. Two examined scallops in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA) and one examined scallops in the Tasman Sea and South Pacific Ocean (New Zealand). One study examined conch in the Florida Keys (USA). One examined clams in the North Atlantic Ocean (Portugal). One examined abalone in the North Pacific Ocean (USA). One examined mussels in Strangford Lough (UK). Two examined mussels in the Gulf of Corinth (Greece). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Mollusc abundance (3 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that translocating bay scallops increased larval recruitment into the adult population compared to before translocation. One before-and-after study in the North Pacific Ocean found that following translocation of adult pink abalone to existing patchy populations, total abalone abundance (translocated and resident) decreased to similar levels as before translocation. One replicated, site comparison study in Strangford Lough found that after translocating horse mussels, the abundance of young mussels was higher in site with translocated mussels compared to both sites without translocated mussels and natural mussel reefs. Mollusc reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that translocating bay scallops did not increase larval production compared to before translocation. Mollusc survival (5 studies): Three replicated studies (one before-and-after and two site comparisons) in the North Atlantic Ocean and in the Tasman Sea and South Pacific Ocean, found that following translocation, scallops and clams survived. Survival of translocated New Zealand scallops was higher in areas closed to commercial fishing compared to fished areas. Two studies in the Gulf of Corinth found that Mediterranean fan mussels survived when translocated to a deep site, and had similar survival compared to naturally-occurring mussels, but did not survive when translocated to a shallow site. Mollusc condition (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that following translocation, clams had similar condition indices to clams in the source site. One study in the Gulf of Corinth found that translocated Mediterranean fan mussels had similar size-specific growth-rates compared to naturally-occurring mussels. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Mollusc behaviour (1 study): One replicated study in the Florida Keys found that translocating non-reproductive adult queen conch to aggregations of reproductive conch did not have adverse effects on the movement patterns of non-translocated resident conch, and all conch displayed similar total distance travelled, movement rates, migration patterns, home-range sizes, and sociability. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2270https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2270Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:38:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate species - Translocate worms One study examined the effects of translocating worm species on their wild populations. The study was in Scottish Lochs (UK). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Worm survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Scottish Lochs found that no reef-forming red tube worm survived when translocated to a new Loch, but survival was high when worms were translocated back to its source Loch. Worm condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Scottish Lochs found that no reef-forming red tube worm survived and so no growth was recorded when translocated to a new loch, worms translocated back to its source Loch grew. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2271https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2271Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:47:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial shelters following release We found no studies that evaluated the effects of providing artificial shelters following the release of species on their populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2272https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2272Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:48:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set recreational catch quotas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of setting recreational catch quotas on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2273https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2273Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:49:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish size limitations for the capture of recreational species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing size limitations for the capture of recreational species on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2274https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2274Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:49:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Tag species to prevent illegal fishing or harvesting One study examined the effects of tagging species to prevent illegal fishing or harvesting on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study examined the effects on the Californian abalone fishery (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOURS (1 STUDY) Behaviour-change (1 study): One before-and-after study in California found no significant reduction in non-compliance with daily quotas of abalones after introducing tagging regulations. OTHER (1 STUDY) Illegal catch (1 study): One before-and-after study in California found no significant reduction in illegal takes of abalones after introducing tagging regulations. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2275https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2275Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:50:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the harvesting of scallops Three studies examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the harvesting of scallops on their populations. One study was in the South Atlantic Ocean (Argentina), one in the English Channel (UK) and one in the Irish Sea (UK). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Scallop abundance (3 studies): Two of three site comparison studies (one replicated, one before-and-after) in the South Atlantic Ocean, the English Channel, and the Irish Sea found that in areas where scallop harvesting had stopped scallop abundance was similar, and one found that scallop biomass was higher, compared to harvested areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2277https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2277Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:53:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the harvest of conch We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the harvest of conch on their populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2278https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2278Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:35:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the harvest of sea urchins We found no studies that evaluated the effects ceasing or prohibiting the harvest of sea urchins on their populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2279https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2279Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:36:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove and relocate invertebrate species before onset of impactful activities We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing and relocating invertebrate species before onset of impactful activities on their populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2280https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2280Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:36:46 +0100