Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (specific intervention unclear): freshwater marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in freshwater marshes or swamps using unspecified or unclear methods. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that marshes in which non-native plants were actively controlled had higher overall plant richness and diversity, after three years, than marshes in which non-native plants were not controlled. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that marshes in which non-native plants were actively controlled had similar overall vegetation cover, after three years, to marshes in which non-native plants were not controlled. Individual species abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than those being controlled. The replicated, site comparison study in the USA found, for example, that spikerush Eleocharis cover was greater in marshes where non-native plants were actively controlled than where they were not controlled. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3083https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3083Fri, 02 Apr 2021 17:04:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (specific intervention unclear): brackish/saline marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in brackish/saline marshes or swamps using unspecified or unclear methods. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in salt marshes in the USA found that plots in which common reed Phragmites australis had been controlled 4–10 years previously contained a similar density of plant stems to nearby natural marshes Individual species abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than those being controlled. The replicated, site comparison study in salt marshes in the USA found that plots in which common reed Phragmites australis had been controlled 4–10 years previously had similar cover of saltmarsh cordgrass Spartina patens to nearby natural marshes. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in salt marshes in the USA found that plots in which common reed Phragmites australis had been controlled 4–10 years previously contained vegetation of similar height to nearby natural marshes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3084https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3084Fri, 02 Apr 2021 17:04:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (multiple interventions): freshwater marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in freshwater marshes or swamps using >3 combined interventions. The study was in Costa Rica. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Costa Rica reported that coverage of live vegetation stands was lower in a plot where southern cattail Typha domingensis had been controlled for >15 years than in a plot where cattail had not been controlled. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): The same study reported that a plot in which southern cattail Typha domingensis had been controlled for >15 years had greater plant species richness than a plot where cattail had not been controlled. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Costa Rica reported that a plot in which southern cattail Typha domingensis had been controlled for >15 years had less live vegetation cover than a plot where cattail had not been controlled. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3087https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3087Sat, 03 Apr 2021 14:52:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control problematic plants (multiple interventions): brackish/saline marshes or swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of controlling problematic plants in brackish/saline marshes or swamps using >3 combined interventions. ‘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%2F3088https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3088Sat, 03 Apr 2021 14:52:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically remove problematic plants: freshwater marshes Five studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically removing problematic plants from freshwater marshes. Three studies were in the USA, one was in India and one was in France. Two of the studies in the USA were in the same site and shared some plots. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that physically removing all vegetation from a cattail-invaded marsh altered the overall plant community composition, over the following two years. Overall richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that removing all vegetation from a cattail-invaded marsh increased overall plant species richness 1–2 years later. Two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies in wet meadows in the USA found that physically removing vegetation had no significant effect on overall plant species richness or diversity three years later. One of the studies removed all vegetation, whilst the other controlled regrowth of the invasive species (by physical removal along with herbicide application). Characteristic plant richness/diversity (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a temporary marsh in France reported that stripping all vegetation increased the number of habitat-characteristic plant species present in the following two years. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (3 studies): Three before-and-after studies (two also replicated, randomized, paired, controlled) in freshwater marshes/wet meadows in India and the USA found that physically removing vegetation had no clear or significant effect on overall vegetation cover, nine months or three years later. Two of the studies removed all vegetation, whilst one controlled regrowth of the invasive species (by physical removal along with herbicide application). Herb abundance (2 studies): Of two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies in loosestrife-invaded wet meadows in the USA, one reported that removing all vegetation increased the cover of grass-like plants, and reduced the cover of forbs, three years later. The other study found that controlling regrowth of the invasive species – by physical removal and applying herbicide – had no significant effect on cover of grass-like plants or forbs after three years. Algae/phytoplankton abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in India reported that removing all vegetation from a knotgrass-invaded marsh increased the cover of algae nine months later. Individual species abundance (3 studies): Three studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than the target problematic species. For example, one before-and-after, site comparison study in India reported that removing all vegetation from a knotgrass-invaded marsh increased the cover of some other common herb species nine months later. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3091https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3091Sat, 03 Apr 2021 14:59:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically remove problematic plants: brackish/salt marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically removing problematic plants from brackish/salt marshes. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Native/non-target abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in pepperweed invaded marshes in the USA found that physically removing pepperweed from plots sprayed with herbicide increased cover of native plants, over the following two years, compared to spraying with herbicide only. Individual species abundance (1 study): The same study quantified the effect of this action on the cover of individual plant species, other than the target of control (see original paper for data). VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3092https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3092Sat, 03 Apr 2021 14:59:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically remove problematic plants: freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically removing problematic plants from freshwater swamps. ‘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%2F3093https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3093Sat, 03 Apr 2021 15:00:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically remove problematic plants: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically removing problematic plants from brackish/saline swamps. ‘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%2F3094https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3094Sat, 03 Apr 2021 15:00:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically damage problematic plants: freshwater marshes Five studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically damaging problematic plants in freshwater marshes. There were two studies in Australia and two in Costa Rica. In each country, the two studies were based in one study area but used different experimental set-ups. The final study was in Mexico. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a freshwater marsh in Costa Rica reported that crushing (and burning) cattail stands reduced the area of live vegetation present 5–22 months later. Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a marsh in Costa Rica found that plots in which cattail-dominated vegetation was crushed had a different overall plant community composition, over the following 15 months, to plots in which vegetation was not crushed. Overall richness/diversity (3 studies): Two controlled studies (one also replicated, randomized, paired) in one freshwater marsh in Costa Rica reported that in plots where cattail-dominated vegetation was crushed (sometimes along with burning), plant species richness and diversity were not lower than in plots where vegetation was not crushed (or burned). Vegetation was surveyed 2–22 months after intervention. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Mexico found that disking after cutting grass-invaded vegetation increased overall plant diversity, after 4–8 months, compared to cutting alone. However, disking had no significant effect on plant richness. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (2 studies): One controlled, before-and-after study in a freshwater marsh in Costa Rica reported that crushing (and burning) cattail stands reduced live vegetation cover 5–22 months later. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Mexico found that disking after cutting grass-invaded vegetation typically had no significant effect on overall plant density, after 4–8 months, compared to cutting alone. Herb abundance (1 study): One study of a floodplain marsh in Australia simply reported grass/sedge cover for up to four years after crushing mimosa-invaded vegetation (along with other interventions). Native/non-target abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a mimosa-invaded wetland in Australia reported that crushing mimosa stands did not reduce – and often increased – cover of non-mimosa vegetation one year later. One study of a floodplain marsh in Australia simply reported non-target vegetation cover for up to four years after crushing mimosa-invaded vegetation (along with other interventions). Individual species abundance (2 studies): Two studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than the species being controlled. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Costa Rica found that plots in which cattail-dominated vegetation was crushed supported a greater abundance of individual plant species other than cattail, over the following 15 months, than plots in which vegetation was not crushed. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a freshwater marsh in Mexico found that disking after cutting grass-invaded vegetation increased the cover of two of five common native plant species, after 4–8 months, compared to cutting alone. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3095https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3095Sat, 03 Apr 2021 16:05:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically damage problematic plants: brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically damaging problematic plants in brackish/salt marshes. ‘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%2F3096https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3096Sat, 03 Apr 2021 16:05:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically damage problematic plants: freshwater swamps Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically damaging problematic plants in freshwater swamps. Both studies were in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One controlled study aiming to restore a swamp in the USA found that ploughing a canarygrass-invaded plot after spraying it with herbicide increased overall plant richness and diversity, two growing seasons later, compared to spraying alone. Native/non-target richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that ploughing a canarygrass-invaded plot after spraying it with herbicide had no significant effect on native plant species richness, two growing seasons later, compared to spraying alone. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Tree/shrub abundance (2 studies): Two controlled studies in the USA evaluated the effects, on tree/shrub abundance, of physically damaging canarygrass-invaded vegetation. One study found that ploughing a canarygrass-invaded plot after spraying it with herbicide had no significant effect on the density of non-planted tree seedlings, two growing seasons later, compared to spraying alone. The other study found that managed plots (cut, disked and sprayed with herbicide) contained more non-planted tree seedlings than unmanaged plots, after 1–3 years. Native/non-target abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study aiming to restore a swamp in the USA found that plots in which canarygrass-invaded vegetation was managed (by disking, along with cutting and applying herbicide) contained at least as much non-canarygrass herb cover, after 1–3 years, to plots in which vegetation was not managed. Individual species abundance (1 study): One controlled study aiming to restore a swamp in the USA reported that ploughing a canarygrass-invaded plot after spraying it with herbicide affected the abundance of some individual plant species – other than the target problematic species – two growing seasons later. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3097https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3097Sat, 03 Apr 2021 16:05:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically damage problematic plants: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of physically damaging problematic plants in brackish/saline swamps. ‘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%2F3098https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3098Sat, 03 Apr 2021 16:06:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage water level to control problematic plantsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of managing water levels to control problematic plants in marshes or swamps. ‘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%2F3099https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3099Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:18:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add salt to control problematic plants: freshwater marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of directly adding salt to control problematic plants in freshwater marshes. ‘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%2F3100https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3100Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:24:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add salt to control problematic plants: brackish/salt marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of directly adding salt to control problematic plants in brackish/salt marshes. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a salt marsh in the USA found that adding salt to control invasive beardgrass Polypogon monspeliensis had no significant effect on the height the dominant native glasswort Salicornia subterminalis. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3101https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3101Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:24:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add salt to control problematic plants: freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of directly adding salt to control problematic plants in freshwater swamps. ‘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%2F3102https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3102Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:25:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add salt to control problematic plants: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of directly adding salt to control problematic plants in brackish/saline swamps. ‘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%2F3103https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3103Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:25:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting/mowing to control problematic herbaceous plants: freshwater marshes Eight studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting/mowing problematic herbaceous plants or small shrubs in freshwater marshes. Six studies were in the USA, one was in Mexico and one was in Canada. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a cattail-dominated marsh in the USA found that cutting altered the overall plant community composition over the following two years. Relative abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a grass-invaded marsh in Mexico found that cut and uncut plots supported a similar relative abundance of six common plant species after 4–8 months. Overall richness/diversity (4 studies): Two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled studies in invaded marshes/wet meadows in the USA found that cut plots typically had greater overall plant species richness and/or diversity than uncut plots, after 1–3 growing seasons. One of the studies carried out other interventions along with cutting. Two replicated, controlled studies in freshwater marshes in the USA and Mexico found that cut and uncut plots had similar overall plant richness and/or diversity, after 1–2 growing seasons. Native/non-target richness/diversity (2 studies): One controlled, before-and-after study in a reed-dominated freshwater marsh in the USA found that cutting/mowing (along with applying herbicide) increased non-reed species richness three years later. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in cattail-invaded marshes in the USA found that mown and unmown marshes had similar native plant species richness after 1–12 months VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (3 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in freshwater marshes in the USA and Mexico found that cut and uncut plots contained a similar amount of vegetation after 1–2 growing seasons. This was true for cover of wetland plants and density of all plants. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in iris-invaded lakeshore marshes in Canada reported that cutting reduced overall vegetation cover, one year later, in a permanently flooded marsh but had no clear effect on cover in an intermittently flooded marsh. Herb abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a cattail-invaded wet meadow in the USA found that plots in which cattail was cut four times over two growing seasons developed greater cover of sedges Carex than uncut plots, but that cutting cattail only twice had no significant effect on sedge cover. Native/non-target abundance (3 studies): Two controlled studies (one also replicated, randomized, paired; one also before-and-after) in reed- or canarygrass-dominated wetlands in the USA found that cut plots typically contained more native or non-target vegetation than uncut plots, after 1–3 growing seasons. Both studies carried out other interventions along with cutting. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in cattail-invaded marshes in the USA found that mown and unmown marshes supported a similar native vegetation density after 1–12 months, and similar native vegetation biomass after 12 months. Individual species abundance (2 studies): Three studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than the species being controlled. For example, one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a grass-invaded marsh in Mexico found that five of five monitored native species had similar cover in cut and uncut plots after 4–8 months. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3104https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3104Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:58:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting/mowing to control problematic herbaceous plants: brackish/salt marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting/mowing problematic herbaceous plants or small shrubs in brackish/salt marshes. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a saltgrass-dominated marsh in the USA found that mown and unmown plots had similar overall plant species richness after one year. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a saltgrass-dominated marsh in the USA found that mown and unmown plots had similar overall vegetation cover after one year. Individual species abundance (1 study): The same study found that six dominant herb species, other than the species being controlled, had similar cover in mown and unmown plots after one year. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3105https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3105Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:59:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting/mowing to control problematic herbaceous plants: freshwater swamps Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting/mowing problematic herbaceous plants or small shrubs in freshwater swamps. Both studies were in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study aiming to restore a swamp in the USA found that mowing canarygrass-invaded vegetation before spraying it with herbicide had no significant effect on overall plant richness or diversity, two growing seasons later, compared to spraying alone. Native/non-target richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that mowing canarygrass-invaded vegetation before spraying it with herbicide had no significant effect on native plant species richness, two growing seasons later, compared to spraying alone. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Tree/shrub abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in the USA evaluated the effects, on tree/shrub abundance, of managing canarygrass-invaded vegetation by cutting. One study found that mowing canarygrass-invaded vegetation before spraying it with herbicide had no significant effect on the density of non-planted tree seedlings, two growing seasons later, compared to spraying alone. The other study found that managed plots (cut, disked and sprayed with herbicide) contained more non-planted tree seedlings than unmanaged plots, after 1–3 years. Native/non-target abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study aiming to restore a swamp in the USA found that plots in which canarygrass-invaded vegetation was managed (by cutting, along with disking and applying herbicide) contained at least as much non-canarygrass herb cover, after 1–3 years, to plots in which vegetation was not managed. Individual species abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study aiming to restore a swamp in the USA reported that mowing canarygrass-invaded vegetation before spraying it with herbicide affected the abundance of some individual plant species two growing seasons later. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3106https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3106Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:59:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting/mowing to control problematic herbaceous plants: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting/mowing problematic herbaceous plants or small shrubs in brackish/saline swamps. ‘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%2F3107https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3107Sun, 04 Apr 2021 10:00:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting to control problematic large trees/shrubs: freshwater marshes Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting down problematic large trees/shrubs in freshwater marshes. One study was in the UK and one was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One study of a dune slack in the UK reported an increase in total vegetation coverage between one and two years after clearing scrub (by cutting and applying herbicide). Overall richness/diversity (1 study): The same study reported a small increase in total plant richness between one and two years after clearing scrub (by cutting and applying herbicide). Characteristic plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study reported an increase in the number of slack-characteristic plant species present between one and two years after clearing scrub (by cutting and applying herbicide). Native/non-target richness/diversity (1 study): The same study reported an increase in native plant richness between one and two years after clearing scrub (by cutting and applying herbicide). VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Individual species abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species, other than the species being controlled. The site comparison study in the USA found that tussock sedge Carex stricta was less dense in a wet meadow restored by removing trees (along with other interventions, including planting sedges) than in nearby natural meadows, after 11–14 years. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA reported that sedge tussocks were shorter in a wet meadow restored by removing trees (along with other interventions, including planting sedges) than in nearby natural meadows, after 11–14 years. Diameter/perimeter/area (1 study): The same study reported that sedge tussocks had a smaller perimeter in a wet meadow restored by removing trees (along with other interventions, including planting sedges) than in nearby natural meadows, after 11–14 years. Basal area (1 study): The same study reported that the basal area of sedge tussocks was smaller in a wet meadow restored by removing trees (along with other interventions, including planting sedges) than in nearby natural meadows, after 11–14 years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3108https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3108Sun, 04 Apr 2021 14:31:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting to control problematic large trees/shrubs: brackish/salt marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting down problematic large trees/shrubs in brackish/salt marshes. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a salt marsh in the USA reported that in seven of nine cases, the overall plant community composition varied more across plots from which mangrove trees had been removed than a plot from which mangrove trees had not been removed. Vegetation was surveyed after two years of continual tree removal. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a salt marsh in the USA reported that removing >50% of invading mangrove trees increased total cover of salt marsh vegetation two years later, but that removing <50% of invading mangrove trees had no clear effect. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3109https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3109Sun, 04 Apr 2021 14:32:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting to control problematic large trees/shrubs: freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting down problematic large trees/shrubs in freshwater swamps. ‘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%2F3110https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3110Sun, 04 Apr 2021 14:32:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cutting to control problematic large trees/shrubs: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting down problematic large trees/shrubs in brackish/saline swamps. ‘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%2F3111https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3111Sun, 04 Apr 2021 14:32:37 +0100