Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change type of livestock Two replicated, before-and-after studies and one controlled study in Spain and the UK found changing the type of livestock led to mixed effects on shrub cover. However, in two of these studies changing the type of livestock reduced the cover of herbaceous species. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the UK found that grazing with both cattle and sheep, as opposed to grazing with sheep, reduced cover of purple moor grass, but had no effect on four other plant species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1608https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1608Sun, 22 Oct 2017 10:05:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create buffer zones beside roads and other transportation corridors We found no studies that evaluated the effects of creating buffer zones beside roads and other transportation corridors on shrublands. '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%2F1618https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1618Sun, 22 Oct 2017 10:33:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut strips of shrubland vegetation to reduce the spread of fire We found no studies that evaluated the effects of cutting strips of vegetation to reduce the spread of fire on shrublands. '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%2F1624https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1624Sun, 22 Oct 2017 10:47:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Apply herbicide to trees One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in South Africa found that using herbicide to control trees increased plant diversity but did not increase shrub cover. One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that herbicide treatment of trees increased the abundance of common heather seedlings. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1629https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1629Sun, 22 Oct 2017 11:29:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut trees One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that cutting birch trees increased density of heather seedlings but not that of mature common heather plants. One replicated, controlled study in South Africa found that cutting non-native trees increased herbaceous plant cover but did not increase cover of native woody plants. One site comparison study in South Africa found that cutting non-native Acacia trees reduced shrub and tree cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1630https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1630Sun, 22 Oct 2017 11:44:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut trees and increase livestock numbers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of controlling tree species by cutting and increasing grazing intensity of livestock on shrublands. '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%2F1635https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1635Sun, 22 Oct 2017 12:01:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut trees and apply herbicide One controlled study in the UK found that cutting trees and applying herbicide increased the abundance of heather seedlings. However, one replicated, controlled study in the UK found that cutting silver birch trees and applying herbicide did not alter cover of common heather when compared to cutting alone. Two controlled studies (one of which was a before-and-after study) in South Africa found that cutting of trees and applying herbicide did not increase shrub cover. Two controlled studies in South Africa found that cutting trees and applying herbicide increased the total number of plant species and plant diversity. One replicated, controlled study in the UK found that cutting and applying herbicide reduced cover of silver birch trees. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1636https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1636Sun, 22 Oct 2017 12:04:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Apply herbicide and sow seeds of shrubland plants to control grass One randomized, controlled study in the USA found that areas where herbicide was sprayed and seeds of shrubland species were sown had more shrub seedlings than areas that were not sprayed or sown with seeds. One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the USA found that spraying with herbicide and sowing seeds of shrubland species did not increase the cover of native plant species, but did increase the number of native plant species. One of two studies in the USA found that spraying with herbicide and sowing seeds of shrubland species reduced non-native grass cover. One study in the USA found that applying herbicide and sowing seeds of shrubland species did not reduced the cover of non-native grasses Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1644https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1644Sun, 22 Oct 2017 13:30:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Apply herbicide and remove plants to control grass One randomized, replicated, controlled, paired study in the USA found that areas sprayed with herbicide and weeded to control non-native grass cover had higher cover of native grasses and forbs than areas that were not sprayed or weeded, but not a higher number of native plant species. The same study found that spraying with herbicide and weeding reduced non-native grass cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1645https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1645Sun, 22 Oct 2017 13:33:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut to control bracken One randomized, controlled, before-and-after trial in Norway and one randomized, controlled study in the UK found that cutting bracken increased the cover or biomass of heather. However, two randomized, replicated, controlled studies in the UK found that cutting bracken did not increase heather cover or abundance of heather seedlings. One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that cutting to control bracken increased the species richness of heathland plant species. However, another randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that cutting to control bracken did not alter species richness but did increase species diversity. One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that cutting bracken increased cover of wavy hair-grass and sheep’s fescue. One controlled study in the UK found that cutting bracken did not increase the abundance of gorse or common cow-wheat. One randomized, controlled, before-and-after trial in Norway and two randomized, controlled studies in the UK found that cutting bracken reduced bracken cover or biomass. One randomized, replicated, controlled, paired study the UK found that cutting had mixed effects on bracken cover. However, one controlled study in the UK found that cutting bracken did not decrease the abundance of bracken. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1653https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1653Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:36:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut and apply herbicide to control bracken One randomized, controlled study in the UK found that cutting and applying herbicide to control bracken did not alter heather biomass. One randomized, controlled, before-and-after trial in Norway found that cutting and applying herbicide increased heather cover. One randomized, replicated, controlled, paired study in the UK found that cutting and using herbicide had no significant effect on the cover of seven plant species. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that cutting bracken followed by applying herbicide increased plant species richness when compared with applying herbicide followed by cutting. Three randomized, controlled studies (one also a before-and-after trial, and one of which was a paired study) in the UK and Norway found that cutting and applying herbicide reduced bracken biomass or cover. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1654https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1654Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:42:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut and burn bracken We found no studies that evaluated the effects of cutting and burning bracken on shrublands. '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%2F1655https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1655Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:47:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut bracken and rotovate One controlled study in the UK found that cutting followed by rotovating to control bracken did not increase total plant biomass or biomass of heather. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1656https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1656Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:50:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Burn shrublands to reduce impacts of pollutants One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that prescribed burning to reduce the impact of nitrogen deposition did not alter the shoot length of common heather or the number of purple moor grass seedlings compared to mowing. A controlled study in the UK found that burning to reduce the concentration of pollutants in a heathland affected by nitrogen pollution did not alter the cover or shoot length of heather relative to areas that were mowed. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1670https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1670Sun, 22 Oct 2017 15:17:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Allow shrubland to regenerate without active management Five before-and-after trials (two of which were replicated) in the USA, UK, and Norway, found that allowing shrubland to recover after fire without any active management increased shrub cover or biomass. One replicated, paired, site comparison in the USA found that sites that were allowed to recover without active restoration had similar shrub cover to unburned areas. One controlled, before-and-after trial in the USA found no increase in shrub cover. One before-and-after trial in Norway found an increase in heather height. One before-and-after trial in Spain found that there was an increase in seedlings for one of three shrub species. Two replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after trials in Spain and Portugal found that there was an increase in the cover of woody plant species. One before-and-after study in Spain found that cover of woody plants increased, but the number of woody plant species did not. One replicated, before-and-after study in South Africa found that the height of three protea species increased after recovery from fire. One before-and-after trial in South Africa found that there was an increase in vegetation cover, but not in the number of plant species. One before-and-after trial in South Africa found an increase in a minority of plant species. Two before-and-after trials in the USA and UK found that allowing shrubland to recover after fire without active management resulted in a decrease in grass cover or biomass. One controlled, before-and-after trial in the USA found an increase in the cover of a minority of grass species. One before-and-after study in Spain found that cover of herbaceous species declined. One replicated, before-and-after study in the UK found mixed effects on cover of wavy hair grass. One controlled, before-and-after trial in the USA found no increase in forb cover. One replicated, randomized, controlled before-and-after trial in Spain found that herb cover declined after allowing recovery of shrubland after fire. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1679https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1679Mon, 23 Oct 2017 09:08:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add topsoil Two randomized, controlled studies in the UK found that the addition of topsoil increased the cover or abundance of heathland plant species. One replicated, site comparison in Spain found an increase in the abundance of woody plants. One randomized, controlled study in the UK found an increase in the number of seedlings for a majority of heathland plants. One controlled study in Namibia found that addition of topsoil increased plant cover and the number of plant species, but that these were lower than at a nearby undisturbed site. One randomized, controlled study in the UK found an increase in the cover of forbs but a reduction in the cover of grasses. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1686https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1686Mon, 23 Oct 2017 09:45:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add peat to soil We found no studies that evaluated the effects of adding peat to soils to encourage recolonization on shrublands. '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%2F1687https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1687Mon, 23 Oct 2017 09:59:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Burn leaf litter We found no studies that evaluated the effects of burning leaf litter on shrublands. '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%2F1690https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1690Mon, 23 Oct 2017 10:39:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add sulphur to soil One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that adding sulphur to the soil of a former agricultural field did not increase the number of heather seedlings in five of six cases. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1691https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1691Mon, 23 Oct 2017 10:40:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Build bird perches to encourage colonisation by plants One replicated, controlled study in South Africa found that building artificial bird perches increased the number of seeds at two sites, but no shrubs became established at either of these sites. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1702https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1702Mon, 23 Oct 2017 11:24:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add peat to soil (alongside planting/seeding) One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that adding peat to soil and sowing seed increased the cover of common heather in the majority of cases, compared to seeding alone. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that adding peat to soil and sowing seed increased the density of heather seedlings, and led to larger heather plants than seeding alone, but that no seedlings survived after two years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1705https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1705Mon, 23 Oct 2017 11:54:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add sulphur to soil (alongside planting/seeding) A randomized, replicated, controlled study in the UK found that adding sulphur to soil alongside sowing seeds did not increase heather cover in a majority of cases. One replicated, controlled study in the UK found that adding sulphur and spreading heathland clippings had mixed effects on cover of common heather, perennial rye-grass, and common bent. One randomized, controlled study in the UK found that adding sulphur to soil alongside planting of heather seedlings increased their survival, though after two years survival was very low. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1710https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1710Mon, 23 Oct 2017 13:17:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add root associated bacteria/fungi to introduced plants Two controlled studies (one of which was randomized) in Spain found that adding rhizobacteria to soil increased the biomass of shrubs. One of these studies also found an increase in shrub height. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1716https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1716Mon, 23 Oct 2017 14:00:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cut and use prescribed burning to control grass One randomized, replicated, controlled, paired, before-and-after study in the UK found that burning and cutting to reduce the cover of purple moor grass reduced cover of common heather but did not reduce cover of purple moor grass. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1724https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1724Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:30:40 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add topsoil (alongside planting/seeding) One randomized, replicated, paired, controlled study in the USA found that addition of topsoil alongside sowing of seed increased the biomass of grasses but reduced the biomass of forbs in comparison to addition of topsoil alone. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1857https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1857Fri, 01 Dec 2017 14:27:24 +0000