Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Practise ‘wildlife gardening’ Four studies evaluated the effects of practising wildlife gardening on butterflies and moths. Two were in the UK and one was in each of France and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the USA found that areas with reduced frequency weeding had a similar species richness of adult butterflies compared to areas with conventional weeding. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Two replicated studies (including one paired, controlled study) in the UK and the USA found that increasing the number and age of potted nettle plants in gardens and weeding less frequently did not increase abundance of butterflies, all caterpillars and caterpillars and eggs of four target species. One replicated, site comparison study in France found that gardens where insecticides and herbicides were not used and where there were natural features had a higher abundance of butterflies, but gardens where fungicides and snail pellets were not used had a lower abundance of butterflies. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One replicated study in the UK reported that caterpillars only occasionally used potted nettle plants in gardens. One site comparison study in the UK found that planted buddleia and marjoram were visited by adult butterflies and moths more frequently than other plant species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3834https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3834Mon, 04 Jul 2022 15:12:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect greenfield sites or undeveloped land in urban areas Two studies evaluated the effects of protecting greenfield sites or undeveloped land in urban areas on butterflies and moths. One study was in Singapore and the other was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in Singapore and Mexico found that protected native forest and grassland in urban areas had a higher species richness of butterflies than urban parks or non-native Eucalyptus plantations. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3836https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3836Mon, 04 Jul 2022 15:25:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant trees to reduce temperatures in cities We found no studies that evaluated the effects of planting trees to reduce temperatures in cities on butterflies and moths. ‘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%2F3838https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3838Mon, 04 Jul 2022 15:35:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant parks, gardens and road verges with appropriate native species Eight studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of planting parks and gardens with appropriate native species. Seven were in the USA and one was in Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (5 studies): Three of five replicated studies (including three paired, three controlled and two site comparison studies) in Germany and the USA found that gardens and road verges planted with native species had a greater species richness of butterfly and moth adults and caterpillars than gardens or verges with mixed or exclusively non-native plant species. The other two studies found that the species richness of adult butterflies was similar in areas planted with native or non-native flowers. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Two of three replicated studies (including two paired and two controlled studies) in the USA found that gardens planted with native species had a higher abundance of butterfly and moth caterpillars than gardens with mixed or exclusively non-native plant species. The third study found that the abundance of adult butterflies was similar in areas planted with native or non-native flowers. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that when taller native milkweed species were planted, they had a higher abundance of monarch butterfly eggs and caterpillars than shorter milkweed species. Survival (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that the survival of pipevine swallowtail eggs and caterpillars was lower on California pipevine planted in gardens than in natural sites. The other study found that the survival of monarch butterfly caterpillars was similar on common milkweed planted in gardens and meadows. Condition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that the growth of monarch butterfly caterpillars was similar on eight different native milkweed species. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that monarch butterfly adults used common milkweed planted in gardens more than milkweed planted in meadows. The other study found that pipevine swallowtail adults used California pipevine planted in gardens less than in natural sites. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3842https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3842Tue, 05 Jul 2022 09:53:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Minimize road lighting to reduce insect attraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of minimizing road lighting to reduce insect attraction. ‘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%2F3852https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3852Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:34:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage land under power lines for butterflies and moths Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing land under power lines for butterflies and moths. Two studies were in each of the USA and Finland, and one was in each of the UK and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in Finland found that land under power lines managed by mechanical cutting had a higher species richness of butterflies than unmanaged land, and butterfly species richness was highest 2–4 years after scrub and trees were cleared. One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that the species richness of butterflies was similar under power lines and on road verges mown once or twice a year, or left unmown. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (6 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in Finland and Canada found that land under power lines managed by mechanical cutting had a higher abundance of butterflies than unmanaged land. The other study found that land under power lines and on road verges managed by mowing had a lower abundance of pearl crescent and northern pearl crescent butterflies, and a similar abundance of other butterflies, to those left unmown. Two of three site comparison studies (including two replicated studies) in the USA, the UK and Finland found that the time since management under power lines did not affect the abundance of Karner blue butterflies or small pearl-bordered fritillaries, but chequered skipper abundance was higher in areas cleared ≤2 years ago than in areas cut ≥4 years earlier. The other study found that power lines cleared of trees and scrub 2–4 years earlier had a higher abundance of butterflies than power lines cleared 1 year or 6–8 years earlier. Two site comparison studies in the USA found that land under power lines managed by cutting or herbicide application, and by mowing or cutting, had a similar abundance of Karner blue butterflies and six other butterfly species, but the abundance of frosted elfin was higher under power lines managed by mowing than those managed by cutting. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK reported that pearl-bordered fritillaries used areas under power lines where scrub had been cleared one or two years earlier, but not under power lines cleared three or more years ago. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3855https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3855Tue, 05 Jul 2022 12:26:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect and connect habitat along elevational gradients We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of protecting and connecting habitat along elevational gradients. ‘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%2F3856https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3856Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:27:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage natural waterbodies in arid areas to prevent desiccation We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing natural waterbodies in arid areas to prevent desiccation. ‘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%2F3858https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3858Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:30:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Mechanically remove mid-storey or ground vegetation to create fire breaks Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of mechanically removing mid-storey or ground vegetation to create fire breaks. One study was in Portugal and the other was in France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Portugal found that cork oak woodlands with more recent or more regular mechanical clearance of woody understorey vegetation had a greater species richness of butterflies than woodlands cleared less frequently or longer ago. One replicated, paired, controlled study in France reported that shrublands where trees and/or bushes were mechanically cleared to create firebreaks had a similar species richness of butterflies to a shrubland where grazing was used to suppress vegetation. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Portugal found that cork oak woodlands with more recent or more regular mechanical clearance of woody understorey vegetation had a higher abundance of butterflies than woodlands cleared less frequently or longer ago. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3881https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3881Thu, 21 Jul 2022 17:04:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes or conservation incentives) Thirty-two studies evaluated the effects of paying farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures on butterflies and moths. Eighteen studies were in the UK, eight were in Switzerland two were in Finland, and one was in each of Sweden, the Czech Republic, the USA and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (18 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Switzerland found that the community composition of butterflies on grasslands that farmers were paid to manage for wildlife was similar to intensively managed grasslands. Richness/diversity (19 studies): Twelve of 15 studies (including eight controlled, one before-and-after and five site comparison studies) in Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Sweden found that the species richness or diversity of butterflies and moths on grassland, field margins, wildflower strips or whole farms managed under agri-environment schemes was higher than on conventional fields or farms. The other three studies found that the species richness of butterflies and micro-moths on grassland, field margins, wildflower strips or whole farms managed under agri-environment schemes was similar to conventional fields or farms. One of two replicated, site comparison studies in Switzerland found that the species richness of butterflies was higher in landscapes with a greater proportion of land managed under agri-environment schemes than in landscapes with a smaller proportion of agri-environment schemes, but the other study found that species richness of butterflies was similar on individual farms with more land managed under agri-environment schemes than on farms with smaller areas of agri-environment schemes. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that the species richness of butterflies on grassland sown under a conservation incentive program was similar to that on native prairie. One replicated, site comparison study in Finland found that the species richness of butterflies and day-flying moths on grassland managed under an agri-environment scheme was lower than on abandoned, unmanaged grassland. POPULATION RESPONSE (27 STUDIES) Abundance (27 studies): Seventeen of 19 studies (including seven controlled studies, one replicated, site comparison study, two before-and-after studies, and eight site comparison studies) in the UK, Sweden, Switzerland and Germany found that the abundance of butterflies and moths overall, and of specific species of butterflies or moths, in woodland, grassland, field margins, wildflower strips or whole farms managed under agri-environment schemes was higher than in unmanaged woodland or conventional fields or farms. The other two studies found that the abundance of butterflies and macro-moths on field margins managed under agri-environment schemes was similar to conventional margins. Three of four replicated studies (including one controlled and three site comparison studies) in the UK and Switzerland found that the abundance of butterflies was higher on farms or in landscapes with a higher proportion of land managed under agri-environment schemes than in areas with less land in agri-environment schemes. The other study found that the abundance of some species was higher, but others were lower, on farms with enhanced agri-environment management compared to simple management. Three studies (including one before-and-after and two replicated, site comparison studies) in Finland and the Czech Republic found that grassland grazed or restored under agri-environment scheme prescriptions had a lower abundance of all but three butterfly and day-flying moth species compared to unmanaged grassland, and that Danube clouded yellow abundance declined after agri-environment scheme mowing was initiated on abandoned grasslands. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that the abundance of butterflies on grassland sown under a conservation incentive program was lower than on native prairie. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3915https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3915Wed, 10 Aug 2022 15:41:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage perennial bioenergy crops to benefit butterflies and moths One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing perennial bioenergy crops to benefit butterflies and moths. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that plots planted with a diverse mix of bioenergy crops had a greater species richness of butterflies than plots planted with fewer species. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that plots planted with a diverse mix of bioenergy crops had a higher abundance of butterflies than plots planted with fewer species. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3918https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3918Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:12:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vineyards to benefit butterflies and moths Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing vineyards to benefit butterflies and moths. One study was in each of the USA and Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the USA and Spain found that grass strips between vine rows had a greater species richness of butterflies than the vine rows themselves, and vineyards managed with fewer chemicals had a greater species richness of butterflies than conventionally managed vineyards. The other study found that vineyards managed to encourage native plants, and where insecticide was rarely used, had a similar species richness of butterflies to conventionally managed vineyards. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the USA found that vineyards managed to encourage native plants, and where insecticide was rarely used, had a greater abundance of butterflies than conventionally managed vineyards. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3919https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3919Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:19:09 +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: 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: 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: Manage woodland edges for maximum habitat heterogeneity Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing woodland edges for maximum habitat heterogeneity. One study was in Belgium and the other was in Finland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in Finland found that two years after felling 5-m-wide woodland edges, and thinning 20-m-wide adjacent forest, the combined species richness of butterflies, diurnal moths and bumblebees was higher than before management or in unmanaged woodland edges. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Belgium found that scalloped woodland edges had a higher abundance of brown hairstreak eggs than straight woodland edges. One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in Finland found that two years after felling 5-m-wide woodland edges and thinning 20-m-wide adjacent forest, the abundance of specialist butterflies was higher than before management or on unmanaged woodland edges. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3942https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3942Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:57:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage wetlands or ponds by grazing or cutting to prevent succession Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing wetlands or ponds by grazing or cutting. Two studies were in the Netherlands and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that fens managed by mowing had a greater species richness of butterflies than fens managed by cattle grazing. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that recently cut fens had fewer large copper eggs than uncut fens. Survival (2 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the Netherlands found that large copper caterpillar survival was lower in recently cut fens, and fens cut in autumn or winter, than in uncut fens. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3950https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3950Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:22:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Mark the location of webs or caterpillars before mowing One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of marking the location of webs or caterpillars before mowing. This study was in Poland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in Poland reported that after marsh fritillary caterpillar webs were marked before mowing, the number of webs increased the following year. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3970https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3970Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:39:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant new hedges Seven studies evaluated the effects of planting new hedges on butterflies and moths. Five studies were in the UK and one was in each of Ireland and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (5 studies): Three of four site comparison studies (including three replicated and three paired studies) in the UK, Ireland and Canada found that established hedgerows had a higher species richness of butterflies and macro-moths than in-field beetle banks, crops or pasture. The other study found that hedgerows had a similar species richness of butterflies to grass banks between fields. One replicated study in the UK found that gorse, oak and blackthorn planted within hedgerows had more species of arthropods, including caterpillars, than more commonly planted hawthorn. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (6 studies): Five of six studies (including one replicated, controlled study, three paired, site comparison studies and two site comparison studies) in the UK, Ireland and Canada found that the abundance of butterflies, moths, macro-moths and gatekeepers was higher along hedgerows than on beetle banks, grass margins without hedgerows, in field interiors, or 5–10 metres away from hedgerows.The other study found that the abundance of butterflies along hedgerows was similar to grass banks between fields without hedgerows. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One site comparison study in the UK found that moths recorded close to hedgerows were more likely to be flying parallel to it than moths recorded further away. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3976https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3976Thu, 18 Aug 2022 10:00:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect in-field trees One study evaluated the effects of protecting in-field trees on butterflies and moths. The study was in Sweden. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Sweden found that where more trees and trees of more species had been retained in pastures, butterfly species richness was higher, but richness was lower when a high proportion of those trees were large. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3978https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3978Thu, 18 Aug 2022 10:40:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant in-field trees (e.g. copses) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of planting in-field trees on butterflies and moths. ‘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%2F3979https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3979Thu, 18 Aug 2022 10:41:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant grass buffer strips/margins around arable or pasture fields Twenty-six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of planting grass margins around arable or pasture fields. Seventeen were in the UK, two were in each of Sweden, the Netherlands and the USA, and one was in each of China, France and Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (15 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (15 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies in the UK found that 2-m grass margins had a greater species richness of butterflies than cropped field edges, but 6-m grass margins did not. The other study found that the species richness of butterflies was similar in grass margins and cropped field edges. Five replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the USA, the UK and Italy found that wider grass margins (up to 6 m wide) had a greater species richness or diversity of butterflies, macro-moths and micro-moths than narrower or conventional width margins, although one of these studies found that the species richness of macro-moths was similar in wide and conventional grass margins. Three of five replicated studies (including three randomized, controlled studies, one controlled study, and one site comparison study) in the UK and Sweden found that floristically enhanced grass buffers or wildflower strips had a greater species richness of butterflies than standard grass margins. The other two studies found that farms with floristically enhanced margins (along with other enhanced agri-environment scheme (AES) options) had a similar species richness of butterflies and moths to farms with standard grass margins (along with basic AES options) and farms with no grass margins or other AES options. One site comparison study in Sweden found that grass margins sown with legumes or a clover and grass ley had a higher species richness of butterflies and moths than uncultivated margins, but less than a species-rich pasture. One replicated study in the Netherlands found that the species richness of butterflies increased over time after the establishment of grass margins. One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that disking or burning grass margins did not affect the species richness of butterflies. POPULATION RESPONSE (22 STUDIES) Abundance (21 studies): Three of four replicated, controlled studies in the UK found that grass margins had a higher abundance of butterflies than cropped field edges. The other study found that the abundance of gatekeepers on grass margins increased over four years after they were sown, but was only higher than cropped field edges at one of three farms after 2–4 years. Three of seven replicated, site comparison studies (including two paired studies) in the USA and the UK found that wider grass margins (up to 6 m wide) had a higher abundance of habitat-sensitive butterflies, macro-moths and micro-moths than narrower or conventional width margins. Two of these studies, and the other four studies, found that the abundance of disturbance-tolerant butterflies, macro-moths generally, and pale shining brown moths specifically, was similar in wide and conventional grass margins. Four replicated studies (including two randomized, controlled studies, one controlled study, and one site comparison study) in the UK and Sweden found that floristically enhanced grass buffers or wildflower strips had a higher abundance of butterflies than standard grass margins, uncultivated margins or margins sown with cereal crop. Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies in the UK found that farms with floristically enhanced margins (along with other enhanced agri-environment scheme (AES) 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 with standard grass margins (along with basic AES options) and farms with no grass margins or other AES options. One site comparison study in Sweden found that grass margins sown with legumes or a clover and grass ley had a higher abundance of butterflies and moths than uncultivated margins or a species-rich pasture. Two replicated, before-and-after studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in the Netherlands and the USA found that mowing, disking or burning grass margins did not affect the abundance of butterflies and moths generally, or diamondback moths specifically, but that disking increased the abundance of disturbance-tolerant butterflies. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that field margins had a similar abundance of butterfly and moth caterpillars to beetle banks established in the middle of fields. Survival (1 study): One site comparison study in China found that the survival of marsh fritillary caterpillars in grass margins around lightly cultivated fields was lower, but survival of egg clusters similar, to in uncultivated, grazed meadows. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in China found that grass margins around lightly cultivated fields were more likely to be occupied by marsh fritillary eggs and caterpillars than uncultivated, grazed meadows. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in France found that meadow brown butterflies used grass margins in a similar way to meadows. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3982https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3982Thu, 18 Aug 2022 11:38:08 +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