Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove, control or exclude invertebrate herbivores One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of removing, controlling or excluding invertebrate herbivores. The study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that at sites fenced to exclude grazing animals there was a higher density of pearl-bordered fritillary butterflies than at unfenced sites. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3885https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3885Tue, 26 Jul 2022 18:24:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase biosecurity checks We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of increasing biosecurity checks. ‘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%2F3887https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3887Tue, 26 Jul 2022 18:26:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict the sale of problem species in garden centres and pet shops We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restricting the sale of problem species in garden centres and pet shops. ‘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%2F3888https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3888Tue, 26 Jul 2022 18:27:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove or control non-native or problematic plants Nine studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of removing or controlling non-native or problematic plants. Five studies were in the USA and one was in each of Poland, South Africa, Australia and Mauritius. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two studies (including one replicated, paired, site comparison study and one controlled study) in Mauritius and the USA found that sites where invasive plants were removed by weeding or cutting and applying herbicide (in one case along with fencing to exclude non-native pigs and deer) had a greater species richness of butterflies than untreated sites. One of these studies also found that sites where Chinese privet was removed had a similar species richness of butterflies to sites which had not been invaded. POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Four of six studies (including three controlled studies, one before-and-after study and two site comparison studies) in Poland, South Africa, the USA and Mauritius found that sites where trees and shrubs were removed or invasive plants were cut to a similar height to native plants, or removed by weeding or cutting and applying herbicide (in one case along with fencing to exclude non-native pigs and deer), had a greater abundance of Apollo butterflies, a higher density of Fender’s blue eggs, or higher total abundance of butterflies, compared to before removal or untreated sites. One of these studies also found that sites where Chinese privet was removed had a similar abundance of butterflies to sites which had not been invaded. The fifth study found that in plots where herbicide was applied to control invasive grasses, the abundance of Columbia silvery blue eggs and caterpillars was similar to unsprayed plots. The sixth study found that, after prescribed burning, an area where bracken fern was also removed had fewer Brenton blue butterfly eggs than an area without removal. One study in Australia reported that a population of purple copper butterfly caterpillars translocated to an area where invasive plants had been removed, along with host plant translocation and other habitat management, increased in number compared to at the time of translocation. Survival (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the USA found that in plots where herbicide was applied to control invasive grasses, the survival of Columbia silvery blue eggs and caterpillars was similar to unsprayed plots. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that one herbicide commonly used to control invasive grasses reduced the survival of snowberry checkerspot caterpillars, but two other herbicides did not affect the survival of snowberry checkerspot, Edith’s checkerspot or Baltimore checkerspot caterpillars. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (3 studies): Two of three randomized, controlled studies (including two replicated, paired studies and one before-and-after study) in the USA found that sites where invasive oat-grass was cut to a similar height to native plants, or where Eastern white pine was removed, were used more by Fender’s blue and frosted elfin butterflies than untreated sites. The third study found that habitat use by Columbia silvery blue butterflies was similar in plots where herbicide was applied to control invasive grasses and in unsprayed plots. Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in Poland found that removal of trees and shrubs, in addition to the release of captive bred adults and pupae, allowed adults from two previously separated populations of Apollo butterflies to mix. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3890https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3890Thu, 28 Jul 2022 15:02:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove, control or exclude vertebrate herbivores Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of removing, controlling or excluding vertebrate herbivores. Three studies were in the USA, two were in the UK, one was in each of Mauritius, the Netherlands, Canada and Japan, and one was a global systematic review. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (6 studies): Two of four replicated studies (including three controlled studies and one site comparison study) in the USA, Mauritius and Canada found that forest plots fenced to exclude, or reduce the density of, non-native pigs and deer (in one case along with weeding of invasive plants) had a greater species richness of butterflies and macro-moths than unfenced plots. The other two studies found that forest plots fenced to exclude elk had mixed effects on the species richness of butterflies and arthropods including moths depending on fire intensity and year. One of these studies also found that grassland plots fenced to exclude elk had a similar species richness of butterflies to unfenced plots in all years. One global systematic review found that reducing or removing grazing or browsing by wild or domestic herbivores in temperate and boreal forests did not affect the species richness of butterflies and moths. POPULATION RESPONSE (10 STUDIES) Abundance (9 studies): Five of eight studies (including five controlled studies, one before-and-after study, and two site comparison studies) in the UK, the USA, Mauritius, Canada and Japan found that forest and grassland plots fenced to exclude, or reduce the density of, deer, sheep, pigs and large herbivores (in one case along with weeding of invasive plants) had a higher abundance of butterflies, moths, caterpillars, rare macro-moths and New Forest burnet moths than unfenced plots. One of these studies also found that the total abundance of macro-moths was similar in fenced and unfenced plots. Two studies found that forest plots fenced to exclude elk had mixed effects on the abundance of butterflies and arthropods including moths depending on fire intensity and year. One of these studies also found that grassland plots fenced to exclude elk had a similar abundance of butterflies to unfenced plots in all years. The eighth study found that a forest fenced to exclude sika deer had a similar abundance of all moths, but a lower abundance of tree-feeding moths, than unfenced forest. One global systematic review found that reducing or removing grazing or browsing by wild or domestic herbivores in temperate and boreal forests increased the abundance of butterflies and moths. Survival (1 study): One paired, controlled study in the Netherlands reported that all Glanville fritillary caterpillar nests survived in grassland fenced to exclude sheep, compared to 88% in a grazed area. Condition (1 study): One paired, controlled study in the Netherlands found that fewer Glanville fritillary caterpillar nests were damaged in grassland fenced to exclude sheep than in a grazed area. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3891https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3891Tue, 09 Aug 2022 11:49:20 +0100