Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use barriers to keep livestock off ungrazed freshwater marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using barriers to keep livestock off freshwater marshes that have never (or not recently) been grazed.   ‘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%2F2962https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2962Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:13:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use barriers to keep livestock off ungrazed brackish/salt marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using barriers to keep livestock off brackish/salt marshes that have never (or not recently) been grazed. The study was in the UK. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in a salt marsh in the UK reported that plots fenced to exclude sheep contained more plant species, after four years, than plots that became grazed by sheep. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in a salt marsh in the UK reported that plots fenced to exclude sheep contained more vegetation biomass, after two years, than plots that became grazed by sheep. Individual species abundance (1 study): The same study also quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. For example, plots fenced to exclude sheep contained more cordgrass Spartina and less saltbush Atriplex hastata, after four years, than plots that became grazed by sheep. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2963https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2963Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:14:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use barriers to keep livestock off ungrazed freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using barriers to keep livestock off freshwater swamps that have never (or not recently) been grazed.   ‘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%2F2964https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2964Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:14:26 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use grazing to maintain or restore disturbance: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using grazing to maintain or restore disturbance 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%2F3053https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3053Thu, 01 Apr 2021 19:58:30 +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 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use grazing to control problematic plants: freshwater marshes Three studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using grazing to control problematic plants in freshwater marshes. Two studies were in the USA. One study was in Costa Rica. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in Costa Rica found that amongst plots where cattail-dominated vegetation had been crushed, grazing had no significant effect on the overall plant community composition over 15 months. Relative abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a canarygrass-invaded marsh in the USA found that grazing had no significant effect on the relative abundance of the invader: over two years, it declined similarly in grazed and ungrazed plots. Overall richness/diversity (3 studies): Of three replicated, paired, controlled studies in invaded marshes/wet meadows in the USA and Costa Rica, two found that grazing typically had no significant effect on plant species richness and/or diversity over approximately two years. The other study found that grazed areas had higher plant species richness than ungrazed areas after two months. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a canarygrass-invaded marsh in the USA found that grazing had no significant effect on total vegetation cover at the ground surface, over two years. Native/non-target abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in an invaded wet meadow in the USA found that two months of grazing increased cover of non-invasive grass-like plants. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3112https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3112Sun, 04 Apr 2021 15:42:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use grazing to control problematic plants: brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using grazing to control 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%2F3113https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3113Sun, 04 Apr 2021 15:42:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use grazing to control problematic plants: freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using grazing 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%2F3114https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3114Sun, 04 Apr 2021 15:47:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use grazing to control problematic plants: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using grazing 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%2F3115https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3115Sun, 04 Apr 2021 15:47:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use covers/barriers to control problematic plants: freshwater marshes One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using covers or barriers to control problematic plants in freshwater marshes. The study was in Canada. VEGETATION COMMUNITY   VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in iris-invaded lakeshore marshes in Canada reported that covering plots with rubber sheeting after cutting back yellow iris Iris pseudacorus prevented most vegetation regrowth in an intermittently flooded marsh, but had no clear effect in a permanently flooded marsh. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3124https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3124Mon, 05 Apr 2021 09:58:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use covers/barriers to control problematic plants: brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using covers or barriers to control 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%2F3125https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3125Mon, 05 Apr 2021 09:58:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use covers/barriers to control problematic plants: freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using covers or barriers 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%2F3126https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3126Mon, 05 Apr 2021 09:59:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use covers/barriers to control problematic plants: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using covers or barriers 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%2F3127https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3127Mon, 05 Apr 2021 09:59:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fences or barriers to protect freshwater wetlands planted with non-woody plants Four studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using fences or barriers to protect freshwater wetlands planted with emergent, non-woody plants. There was one study in each of Canada, the Netherlands, Israel and the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that amongst planted/sown lakeshores, those protected with fences or wave breaks contained different wetland plant communities, after 1–6 years, than those without fences or wave breaks. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Individual species abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study at the edge of a freshwater lake in the Netherlands found that amongst plots planted with lakeshore bulrush Scirpus lacustris, those from which wildfowl had been excluded contained a greater density and biomass of lakeshore bulrush, after 1–2 years, than those that remained open to wildfowl. VEGETATION STRUCTURE   OTHER Survival (2 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled studies in freshwater wetlands in Canada and Israel reported that protecting emergent herbs, with silt screens or herbivore fencing, increased survival rates over 12–18 months after planting. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3328https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3328Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:14:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fences or barriers to protect brackish/saline wetlands planted with non-woody plantsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using fences or barriers to protect brackish/saline wetlands planted with emergent, non-woody plants.   ‘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%2F3329https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3329Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:14:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fences or barriers to protect freshwater wetlands planted with trees/shrubs Five studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using fences or barriers to protect freshwater wetlands planted with trees/shrubs. Four studies were in the USA and one was in Australia. VEGETATION COMMUNITY   VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Tree/shrub abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a floodplain swamp clearing in the USA found that amongst plots sown with tree seeds, fencing to exclude deer had no significant effect on total tree seedling density after three years. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (2 studies): One replicated, paired, controlled study in a floodplain swamp clearing in the USA found that amongst plots sown with tree seeds, those also fenced to exclude deer contained taller tree seedlings, after three years, than those left unfenced. One replicated, paired, controlled study in created freshwater wetlands in the USA found that the average height of white cedar Thuja occidentalis saplings typically increased by a similar amount, between two and five years after planting, in plots fenced to exclude deer and plots left unfenced. OTHER Survival (3 studies): One replicated, paired, controlled study in floodplain swamps in Australia reported that planted swamp gum Eucalyptus camphora seedlings had a much higher survival rate, over one year, in plots fenced to exclude mammals than in open plots. Two replicated, paired, controlled studies in freshwater wetlands in the USA reported that exclusion fencing sometimes increased survival of planted tree seedlings but sometimes had no clear or significant effect. This depended on factors such as the season of planting, seedling elevation, and site. Growth (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in a nutria-invaded wetland in the USA found that planted baldcypress Taxodium distichum seedlings grew more, over one growing season, when protected than when left unprotected. Plastic guards increased height and diameter growth rates. Sticky, insect-repellent oil increased the growth rate for height, but not diameter. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3330https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3330Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:15:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fences or barriers to protect planted brackish/saline wetlands planted with trees/shrubs One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of using fences or barriers to protect brackish/saline wetlands planted with trees/shrubs. The study was in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY   VEGETATION ABUNDANCE   VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in exposed coastal sites in the USA found that red mangrove Rhizophora mangle propagules planted within full-length plastic shelters had grown taller than propagules planted without shelter in three of four comparisons, made 22–129 days after planting. OTHER Survival (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in exposed coastal sites in the USA reported that full-length plastic shelters increased the survival rate of planted red mangrove Rhizophora mangle propagules over 4–8 months, but that full-length bamboo shelters and below-ground plastic shelters had no clear effect on survival. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3331https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3331Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:15:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use flotation devices to support planted vegetationWe found no studies that evaluated the effects of using flotation devices to support emergent vegetation planted in wetlands.   ‘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%2F3340https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3340Sun, 11 Apr 2021 16:45:23 +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
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue