Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Burn at specific time of year Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of burning at a specific time of year. One study was in Australia, and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that carrying out prescribed burns in autumn did not increase small mammal abundances or biomass relative to burning in summer. Survival (1 study): A randomized, replicated, controlled study in Australia found that in forest burned early in the dry season, northern brown bandicoot survival rate declined less than in forests burned late in the dry season. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2416https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2416Mon, 01 Jun 2020 09:39:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide shelter structures after fire We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of providing shelter structures after fire. ‘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%2F2418https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2418Mon, 01 Jun 2020 11:03:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees to reduce wildfire risk Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of thinning trees to reduce wildfire risk. All three studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that reducing tree density increased abundances of two of four small mammal species. A systematic review in the USA found that, in thinned forests, two mammal species were recorded in higher densities compared to in unmanaged forests, while three species showed no effect. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that thinning followed by prescribed burning did not increase use of forest areas by North American elk in most season, stand age and sex comparisons. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2477https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2477Thu, 04 Jun 2020 10:46:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove burnt trees and branches after wildfire One study evaluated the effects on mammals of removing burnt trees and branches after wildfire. This study was in Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A replicated, randomized, controlled study in Spain found that removing burned trees and branches after wildfire did not increase European wild rabbit numbers compared to removing burned trees but leaving branches in place. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2478https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2478Thu, 04 Jun 2020 11:07:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove mid-storey vegetation in forest One study evaluated the effects on mammals of removing mid-storey vegetation in forest. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): A randomized, replicated, controlled study in the USA found that after removing mid-storey vegetation, mammal species richness increased. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A randomized, replicated, controlled study in the USA found that after removing mid-storey vegetation, mammal abundance increased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2480https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2480Thu, 04 Jun 2020 11:15:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove understorey vegetation in forest Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of removing understorey vegetation in forest. All three studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies (two also before-and-after), in the USA, found that compared to prescribed burning, mechanically removing understorey vegetation growth in forests did not increase abundances of white-footed mice, shrews or four rodent species. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2482https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2482Thu, 04 Jun 2020 11:27:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove trees and shrubs to recreate open areas of land Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of removing trees and shrubs to recreate open areas of land. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A controlled study in the USA found that where Ashe juniper trees were removed, there were higher abundances of three rodent species. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that removing trees increased use of areas by Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2483https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2483Thu, 04 Jun 2020 11:42:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial waterholes in dry season Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of providing artificial waterholes in the dry season. One study was in South Africa, one was in Tanzania and one was in Jordan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): A site comparison study in Tanzania found that artificial waterholes were used by a similar number of large mammal species as was a natural waterhole. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): A study in South Africa found that areas around artificial waterholes were used more by eight out of 13 mammalian herbivore species than was the wider landscape. A study in Jordan found that artificial waterholes were used by striped hyenas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2484https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2484Thu, 04 Jun 2020 12:15:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fencing to protect water sources for use by wild mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using fencing to protect water sources for use by wild mammals. ‘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%2F2493https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2493Thu, 04 Jun 2020 15:02:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide supplementary food after fire One study evaluated the effects on mammals of providing supplementary food after fire. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): A replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that supplementary feeding did not increase survival of hispid cotton rats following prescribed fire. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2494https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2494Thu, 04 Jun 2020 15:06:37 +0100