Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase crop diversity across a farm or farmed landscape      Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of increasing crop diversity across a farm or farmed landscape. Both studies were in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in Switzerland found that farms and landscapes with a greater number of habitats or crop types had a similar species richness of butterflies to farms and landscapes with fewer different habitats or crop types. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a greater number of habitats had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with fewer different habitats. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3921https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3921Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:45:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncropped, cultivated margins or plots Four studies evaluated the effects of leaving uncropped, cultivated margins or plots on butterflies and moths. Three were in the UK and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two of three replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study, one replicated, randomized, site comparison study, and one site comparison study) in the UK and Switzerland found that farms managed under agri-environment schemes, or with a greater area of in-field agri-environment scheme options, both including uncropped cultivated margins, had a similar species richness of butterflies and moths to conventional farms or farms with a smaller area of in-field options. The other study found that fields with wider margins between crops had higher butterfly species richness in one of two years. POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the UK found that fields with wider margins between crops had a higher abundance of butterflies in one of two years. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the UK found that farms managed under agri-environment schemes (AES), including uncropped cultivated margins, had a higher abundance of butterflies and micro-moths, but a similar abundance of other moths, compared to conventionally managed farms. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that farms managed with enhanced AES options, including uncropped, cultivated margins, had a higher abundance of some butterflies, but a lower abundance of other butterflies, than farms with simpler AES management. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a larger area of in-field AES options, including uncropped, cultivated plots, had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with a smaller area of in-field AES options. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3923https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3923Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:56:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave unharvested crop headlands within arable fields One study evaluated the effects of leaving unharvested crop headlands within arable fields. This study was in France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in France found that unharvested alfalfa headlands had a greater species richness of butterflies than harvested alfalfa or wheat fields. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in France found that unharvested alfalfa headlands had a higher abundance of butterflies than harvested alfalfa or wheat fields. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3924https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3924Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:02:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant crops in spring rather than autumn We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of planting crops in spring rather than autumn. ‘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%2F3925https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3925Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:03:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Undersow spring cereals, with clover for example Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of undersowing spring cereals. One study was in the UK and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that spring barley undersown with a mix of grasses and legumes had a higher species richness of butterflies than extensively or conventionally managed grassland. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a larger area of in-field agri-environment scheme options, including undersown cereals, had a similar species richness of butterflies to farms with a smaller area of in-field agri-environment scheme POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that spring barley undersown with a mix of grasses and legumes had a higher abundance of butterflies, but a lower abundance of caterpillars, than extensively or conventionally managed grassland. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a larger area of in-field agri-environment scheme options, including undersown cereals, had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with a smaller area of in-field agri-environment scheme BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3926https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3926Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:09:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create beetle banks Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of creating raised beetle banks in arable fields. All four were in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that beetle banks and field margins managed under agri-environment schemes had a higher species richness of micro-moths, and a similar species richness of macro-moths, than conventionally managed field margins. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that the species richness of butterflies on beetle banks was lower than along hedgerows. POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the UK found that beetle banks had a similar abundance of caterpillars to field margins, crop fields and a range of other field-edge farmland habitats. One of these studies also found that the abundance of adult butterflies was lower on beetle banks than along hedgerows. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that beetle banks and field margins managed under agri-environment schemes had a higher abundance of micro-moths, and a similar abundance of macro-moths, than conventionally managed field margins. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3927https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3927Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:12:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage rice field banks to benefit butterflies and moths One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing rice field banks to benefit butterflies and moths. This study was in Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Italy found that unmown, herbicide-free rice field banks had a greater species richness of butterflies than banks which were mown or sprayed with herbicide. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Italy found that unmown, herbicide-free rice field banks had a higher abundance of butterflies, including large copper, than banks which were mown or sprayed with herbicide. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3928https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3928Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:33:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore arable land to permanent grassland Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring arable land to permanent grassland. Six studies were in the UK, two were in Finland, and one was in each of Switzerland and Taiwan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (9 STUDIES) Community composition (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and Finland found that grasslands restored from bare soil by seeding developed butterfly communities that were increasingly similar to existing high-quality grasslands over the first 10 years after establishment. The other study found that older grasslands established by sowing with competitive seed mixes had a greater proportion of specialist butterflies than newer grasslands sown with less competitive species which required re-seeding every 4–5 years. Richness/diversity (8 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies (including two paired studies) in Switzerland, the UK and Taiwan found that 4–5-year-old created grasslands and abandoned cropland had a greater species richness of butterflies, burnet moths and all moths than conventionally managed grassland or cultivated farms. Two of three replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study and two site comparison studies) in the UK and Finland found that grasslands established by sowing grasses, legumes and other non-woody, broadleaved plants (forbs), or perennial grass mixes, had a higher species richness of butterflies (in one case including other pollinators) than grasslands established with grass-only mixes or less competitive species. The third study found that grasslands established by sowing complex or simple seed mixes, or by natural regeneration, all had a similar species richness of butterflies and day-flying moths, but species richness was higher on grasslands created <10 years ago than on grasslands created >20 years ago. One before-and-after study in the UK found that after the adoption of an Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme, including reverting arable land to permanent grassland, the species richness of large moths on a farm increased. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that over 10 years after restoration, the number of species of butterfly on seeded grassland remained similar each year. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Two of three replicated, paired, site comparison studies in the UK and Taiwan found that restored grassland had a higher abundance of moths than conventional grassland or unrestored crop fields, and a similar abundance to semi-natural grasslands, but abundance did not increase with time since restoration. The third study found that abandoned cropland had a similar abundance of butterflies to cultivated farms. Two of three replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study and two site comparison studies) in the UK and Finland found that grasslands established by sowing grasses, legumes and other non-woody, broadleaved plants (forbs), or perennial grass mixes, had a higher abundance of butterflies (in one case including other pollinators) than grasslands established with grass-only mixes or less competitive species. The third study found that grasslands restored by sowing complex or simple seed mixes, or by natural regeneration, all had a similar abundance of caterpillars. One before-and-after study in the UK found that after the adoption of an Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme on a farm, including reverting arable land to permanent grassland, the abundance of large moths and five species of butterfly increased, but the abundance of two species of butterfly decreased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3929https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3929Thu, 11 Aug 2022 18:15:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant wild bird seed or cover mixture Seven studies evaluated the effects of planting wild bird seed or cover mixture on butterflies and moths. All seven were in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (4 studies): Two of three replicated, controlled studies (including two randomized and one paired study) in the UK found that plots sown with wild bird seed mixture had a greater species richness of butterflies than wheat crop or extensively or conventionally managed grassland. The other study found that land managed under an agri-environment scheme, including wild bird seed plots, had a similar species richness of butterflies to conventional farmland. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that plots sown with lucerne had a greater species richness of butterflies than plots sown with borage, chicory, sainfoin and fodder radish. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the UK­ found that plots sown with wild bird seed had a higher abundance of butterflies than wheat crop or extensively or conventionally managed grassland, but that caterpillar abundance was lower in wild bird seed plots than either grassland. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the UK found that the abundance of butterfly and moth caterpillars in wild bird seed plots was similar to a range of other cropped and non-cropped farm habitats. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including one paired study) in the UK found that farms with wild bird seed plots (along with other agri-environment scheme options) had a higher abundance of some butterflies and micro-moths, a similar abundance of macro-moths, but a lower abundance of other butterflies, than farms without agri-environment scheme management. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that plots sown with lucerne and red clover had a higher abundance of butterflies than plots sown with borage, chicory and sainfoin. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3930https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3930Thu, 11 Aug 2022 19:22:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Produce coffee in shaded plantations Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of producing coffee in shaded plantations. Two studies were in Mexico and one was in Puerto Rico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One paired sites, site comparison study in Mexico found that a plantation with its original canopy but understory replaced with coffee had higher species richness of fruit-eating butterflies than one with its original canopy and understory replaced with coffee and other vegetation or those with canopies replaced with other shading trees and understories replaced with coffee with or without other vegetation. One site comparison study in Mexico found that shaded coffee plantations had a higher species richness of caterpillars than a sun-grown monoculture. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in Puerto Rico and Mexico found that shade-grown coffee plantations had a greater abundance of caterpillars than sun-grown coffee plantations. One of these studies also found that the abundance of coffee leaf miner was similar in shade-grown and sun-grown plantations. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3931https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3931Thu, 11 Aug 2022 19:51:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant nectar flower mixture/wildflower strips Twenty-three studies evaluated the effects of planting nectar flower mixtures, or wildflower strips, on butterflies and moths. Eleven studies were in the UK, six were in Switzerland, two were in the USA, and one was in each of Sweden, Finland and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (20 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (20 studies): Eight of thirteen studies (including twelve replicated studies, two randomized studies, five controlled studies, one before-and-after study, and eight site comparison studies) in the UK, Switzerland, Finland and Germany found that sown wildflower strips had a higher species richness and diversity of all butterflies, generalist butterflies, and moths than conventional field margins, unsown margins, cropped fields or conventional grassland. One of these studies also found that the species richness of specialist butterflies was similar in sown wildflower strips, cropped fields and conventional grassland. Four studies found that the species richness of butterflies was similar between sown wildflower strips and cropped fields, cropped margins, unsown strips or extensively managed meadows. The other study found that, five years after sowing wildflower strips, butterfly species richness, but not diversity had increased at one of two study sites. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the UK found that the species richness of butterflies and moths was similar on farms managed under agri-environment schemes, including with sown wildflower strips, and on conventionally managed farms. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study and one site comparison study) in the UK and Sweden found that field margins sown with wildflowers had a greater species richness of butterflies than grass-only field margins. One of two replicated, paired, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the USA and the UK found that plots sown with a mix of wildflowers had a greater species richness of caterpillars than plots sown with a single flower species. The other study found that plots sown with either complex or simpler flower mixes had a similar species richness of butterflies. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in the UK found that wildflower plots sown with phacelia, borage or lucerne had a higher species richness or diversity of butterflies and moths than plots sown with other flower species. POPULATION RESPONSE (16 STUDIES) Abundance (17 studies): Ten studies (including nine replicated studies, three randomized studies, three controlled studies and seven site comparison studies) in the UK, Switzerland and Finland found that sown wildflower strips had a higher abundance of all butterflies, generalist butterflies, specialist butterflies and meadow brown butterflies than conventional field margins, unsown margins, cropped fields, cropped margins, conventional grassland or extensively managed meadows. However, one of these studies only found this effect in one of two study years. Two of these studies also found that the abundance of specialist butterflies and meadow brown caterpillars was similar in sown wildflower strips and unsown margins, cropped fields and conventional grassland, and one found that the abundance of caterpillars was lower in sown wildflower strips than in conventional grassland. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the UK found that the abundance of butterflies and micro-moths was higher on farms managed under agri-environment schemes, including with sown wildflower strips, than on conventionally managed farms, but the abundance of other moths was similar. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study and one site comparison study) in the UK and Sweden found that field margins sown with wildflowers had a higher abundance of butterflies than grass-only field margins. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that farms with wildflower strips (along with other enhanced agri-environment scheme options) had a higher abundance of some butterflies, but a lower abundance of other butterflies, than farms with simpler agri-environment scheme management such as grass-only margins. One of two replicated, paired, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the USA and the UK found that plots sown with one of three wildflower mixes had a higher abundance of moths than plots sown with two other mixes or a single flower species. The other study found that plots sown with either complex or simple flower mixes had a similar abundance of butterflies. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that wildflower plots sown with lucerne had a higher abundance of butterflies than plots sown with borage, chicory or sainfoin. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): Two studies (including one replicated study) in the UK and the USA reported that sown nectar flower plots and tropical milkweed plots were used by six species of butterflies and moths and monarch butterflies and caterpillars. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3932https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3932Fri, 12 Aug 2022 06:26:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant more than one crop per field (intercropping) One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of planting more than one crop per field. The study was in Malaysia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Malaysia found that smallholdings planted with oil palm and other crops did not differ in butterfly community composition from those planted with oil palm alone. Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Malaysia found that smallholdings planted with oil palm and other crops did not have greater butterfly species richness than those planted with oil palm alone. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Malaysia found that smallholdings planted with oil palm and other crops did not have higher overall butterfly abundance than those planted with oil palm alone. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3983https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3983Sat, 20 Aug 2022 19:18:11 +0100
What Works 2021 cover

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 purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The 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

Go to the CE Journal

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.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust