Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect habitat Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of legally protecting habitat. Six studies were in the UK and one was in each of Australia, Singapore and Ireland and the USA. Three of the studies used data from the same national monitoring scheme across different years. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Singapore found that protected primary or secondary forest reserves had a higher species richness of butterflies than unprotected forest fragments. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Ireland reported that raised bogs protected as Special Areas of Conservation (where restoration had sometimes taken place) had a similar species richness of moths to unprotected bogs. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that, in the first three years after protection as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), woodland, grassland and heathland sites lost a similar proportion of 29 threatened butterfly species to unprotected sites. POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Three of five site comparison studies (including four replicated studies and one before-and-after study) in the UK and Ireland found that sites protected as National Nature Reserves or Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) (in one case also managed by coppicing), or surrounded by SSSIs, had a higher abundance of heath fritillary, all butterflies and 30/57 species of butterfly than unprotected sites. However, one of these studies only found the result using one of two sets of sites. The other two studies found that grasslands protected as National Nature Reserves or SSSIs and raised bogs protected as Special Areas of Conservation had a similar total abundance of moths, and change in abundance of chalkhill blue butterflies, to unprotected sites. However, one of these studies found mixed results for individual moth species. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that, at sites with the highest levels of protection, abundances of Karner blue, frosted elfin and Persius duskywing did not change over time, whereas they decreased at sites with lower levels of protection. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that protected grasslands assessed as being in “Favourable” habitat condition had worse population trends for 4/8 butterfly species but better for 1/8 species than grasslands in “Unfavourable” condition. One study in Australia reported that after a grassland was designated as a local reserve, populations of golden sun-moth and pale sun-moth persisted for at least four years. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3831https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3831Mon, 04 Jul 2022 13:36:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase consideration of butterflies and moths in international, national and local conservation plans We found no studies that evaluated the effects of increasing the consideration of butterflies and moths in international, national and local conservation plans. ‘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%2F3848https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3848Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:27:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect butterflies and moths We found no studies that evaluated the effects of legally protecting 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%2F3863https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3863Fri, 08 Jul 2022 11:54:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect large native trees We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of legally protecting large native trees. ‘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%2F3865https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3865Fri, 08 Jul 2022 11:58:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave some areas unburned during prescribed burning Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of leaving some areas unburned during prescribed burning. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated study in the USA reported that the abundance of Karner blue butterflies increased over 2–3 years in oak savannas and prairies where unburned patches were left during prescribed burning. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that six out of nine specialist butterfly species were more abundant, one was less abundant, and two had similar abundance in pine barrens and prairies where unburned areas were left during prescribed burning compared to at sites without unburned areas. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the USA reported that Karner blue butterflies were recorded using all 11 unburned patches which were surveyed within oak savannas and prairies managed by burning. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3879https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3879Thu, 21 Jul 2022 16:45:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase biosecurity checks We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of increasing biosecurity checks. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3887https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3887Tue, 26 Jul 2022 18:26:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce legislation to control the use of hazardous substances We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of introducing legislation to control the use of hazardous substances. ‘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%2F3892https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3892Tue, 09 Aug 2022 13:02:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands) Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of leaving headlands in fields unsprayed. Four studies were in the UK, and two were in the Netherlands. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled studies in the UK and the Netherlands found that unsprayed headlands in arable fields had a greater species richness of butterflies than headlands sprayed with herbicide and insecticide. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Four of five replicated, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in the UK and the Netherlands found that unsprayed headlands in arable and pasture fields had a greater abundance of butterflies and caterpillars than headlands sprayed with herbicide and insecticide. The other study found that unsprayed headlands in arable fields had a similar abundance of caterpillars to headlands sprayed with herbicide. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the UK found that large white, small white and green-veined white butterflies spent more time in unsprayed arable headlands than adjacent hedgerows, but more time in the hedgerows when adjacent headlands were sprayed with herbicide. The same study found that gatekeepers spent more time in hedgerows than headlands regardless of whether the headlands were unsprayed or sprayed. Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the UK found that large white, small white and green-veined white butterflies spent more time feeding and interacting, or had slower flight speeds, in unsprayed arable headlands than in headlands sprayed with herbicide. However, the same study found that male gatekeepers spend less time feeding and interacting, and had faster flight speeds, in unsprayed headlands than in sprayed headlands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3898https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3898Tue, 09 Aug 2022 14:23:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain species-rich, semi-natural grassland Nineteen studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of maintaining species-rich, semi-natural grassland. Five studies were in Germany, four were in the USA, two were in each of Switzerland and the Czech Republic, and one was in each of Finland and Russia, China, Italy, Spain, Hungary and Austria. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (12 STUDIES) Community composition (6 studies): Four replicated, site comparison studies in the USA, the Czech Republic, Austria and Germany found that the community composition of butterflies, day-flying moths and nocturnal moths was different between summer cattle-grazed, early-mown and late-mown grassland, between mown and grazed grassland, and between prairies managed by cattle grazing and/or rotational burning. However, one of these studies found that the community composition of butterflies was similar in mown and grazed grassland. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the Czech Republic and Germany found that species-rich grassland managed by grazing or mowing had a similar community composition of butterflies and burnet moths to abandoned grassland. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that meadows managed by mowing at least twice/year after mid-June had a different community composition of butterflies to sown wildflower strips. Richness/diversity (11 studies): Three of six site comparison studies (including five replicated studies) in Germany, the USA, Russia and Finland, Italy and the Czech Republic found that the species richness of butterflies was similar on semi-natural grassland managed by light grazing or by annual mowing in July or August, and on prairies managed by cattle grazing and/or rotational burning. One study found that the species richness of butterflies was higher in grassland managed by sheep and cattle grazing than in grassland mown annually for hay in June. One study found that the species richness of moths was higher in grassland managed by annual mowing than grassland managed by grazing, and the species richness of butterflies was highest in grasslands where mowing was staggered throughout the year, with some areas left uncut. The sixth study found that in some areas, the species richness of specialist and grassland butterflies was higher in prairies managed by two-year rotational haying, and in other areas it was higher in prairies managed by grazing, but in all cases richness was higher at sites longer after they were last managed. Two replicated, site comparison studies in Germany found that species-rich grasslands managed by summer-grazing, grazing or mowing had a similar species richness of butterflies and burnet moths and nocturnal moths to unmanaged grassland. However, one of these studies also found that grasslands managed by mowing had a lower species richness of nocturnal moths than unmown grassland. Two replicated, site comparison studies in Germany and Hungary found that old meadows mown in July and lightly grazed or annually mown meadows had a higher species richness of adult butterflies and caterpillars than recently established set-aside or cereal crops. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that meadows mown at least twice/year after mid-June had a similar species richness of butterflies to sown wildflower strips. POPULATION RESPONSE (16 STUDIES) Abundance (16 studies): Five of ten site comparison studies (including nine replicated studies) in Germany, the USA, Russia and Finland, Italy, Spain and the Czech Republic found that semi-natural grasslands had a similar abundance of butterflies generally, and individual species of butterflies and moth caterpillars, when managed by extensive sheep, sheep and goat, cattle or livestock grazing compared to annual or occasional mowing, or rotational mowing or burning. Four of these studies found that grasslands managed by cattle, sheep or livestock grazing had a higher abundance of butterflies generally, and individual species of butterflies and moth caterpillars, than grasslands managed by annual mowing, rotational burning or unmanaged grasslands. Three of these studies found that grasslands managed by haying had a higher abundance of individual butterfly species than grasslands managed by grazing or burning or unmanaged grasslands. Four of these studies found that specific butterfly species and all butterflies were less abundant in mown, grazed or rotationally burned grassland than in unmanaged, rotationally burned or grazed and burned grassland. The ninth study found that in some areas, the abundance of specialist and grassland butterflies was higher in prairies managed by two-year rotational haying or by grazing, but in all cases abundance was higher at sites longer after they were last managed. One of three replicated, site comparison studies in Germany and Switzerland found that traditional hay meadows mown once/year in June or July had a higher abundance of heath fritillary adults and caterpillars than old, abandoned meadows. One study found that summer-grazed or mown grasslands had a higher abundance of farmland butterflies and burnet moths, but a lower abundance of woodland butterflies and burnet moths, than abandoned grasslands. The third study found that mown grasslands had a lower abundance of moths than unmown grasslands, but grazed grasslands had a similar abundance of moths to ungrazed grasslands. Two replicated, site comparison studies in China and Switzerland found that semi-natural grasslands managed by grazing or cutting twice/year after mid-June had a lower abundance of marsh fritillary eggs and caterpillars and adult butterflies than ungrazed margins and intercrops or sown wildflower strips. One replicated, site comparison study in Hungary found that semi-natural grasslands managed by either light grazing or mowing once/year in May or June had a higher abundance of butterflies than conventional wheat fields. Survival (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in China found that marsh fritillary eggs had a similar survival rate in uncultivated, grazed meadows and cultivated, ungrazed field margins and intercrops, but the survival of caterpillars was higher in the grazed meadows. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Use (5 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in Austria and Germany found that 14 species of moth preferred grazed pastures while 24 others avoided them, and three species of butterfly and ten nocturnal moths preferred mown meadows, while 19 nocturnal moth species avoided them. One replicated, site comparison study in Spain found that meadows managed by summer-grazing or hay-mowing were more likely to be occupied by grizzled skipper and painted lady than unmanaged meadows, but small pearl-bordered fritillary occurred less frequently in grazed meadows than in hay meadows or abandoned meadows. One replicated, site comparison study in Finland and Russia found that three of 37 butterfly species preferred meadows which were mown annually in July or August to cattle-grazed pasture, but the other 34 species showed no preference. One replicated, site comparison study in China found that uncultivated, grazed meadows were less likely to be occupied by marsh fritillary eggs and caterpillars than cultivated field margins and intercrops.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3908https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3908Wed, 10 Aug 2022 11:31:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase or maintain the proportion of natural or semi‐natural habitat in the farmed landscape Twelve studies evaluated the effects of increasing or maintaining the proportion of natural or semi-natural habitat in the farmed landscape on butterflies and moths. Three studies were in Switzerland, two were in each of Germany, Sweden and the UK, and one was in each of the USA, Malaysia, and New Zealand. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (11 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (11 studies): Nine of eleven studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study, one before-and-after study and eight replicated, site comparison studies) in Germany, Sweden, Malaysia, Switzerland, the UK, and New Zealand found that the species richness of butterflies, burnet moths and all moths was higher on farms with a greater proportion of semi-natural habitat or with a greater proportion of woodland in the surrounding landscape, or after semi-natural habitat had been created, compared to conventional farmland or farmland with a greater proportion of arable land in the surrounding landscape. One study found that species richness of butterflies in oil palm plantations was higher where ground coverage of weeds had been maintained but similar whether or not epiphyte or fern coverage was maintained. The eleventh study found that the species richness of butterflies was similar on farms with different proportions of semi-natural habitat. POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Abundance (8 studies): Six replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study and five site comparison studies) in Sweden, the UK, New Zealand, and Switzerland found that the abundance of butterflies and moths was higher on farms with a greater proportion of semi-natural habitat, or in semi-natural habitat compared to conventional farmland. One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA and Sweden found that the abundance of four out of eight species of butterflies was higher on farms surrounded by woodland, but the abundance of least skipper was lower on farms with more semi-natural habitat. The other study found that overall butterfly abundance was similar on farms surrounded by different proportions of woodland and arable land. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3910https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3910Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:34:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce mated females to increase genetic diversity We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of introducing mated females to increase genetic diversity. ‘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%2F3912https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3912Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:57:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage host species’ populations for the benefit of dependent parasite/mutualist species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing host species’ populations for the benefit of dependent parasite or mutualist species of butterfly or moth. ‘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%2F3913https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3913Wed, 10 Aug 2022 15:02:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional orchards to benefit butterflies and moths Two studies evaluated the effects of maintaining traditional orchards on butterflies and moths. One study was in each of the USA and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that managed orchards had a similar community composition of butterflies and burnet moths to abandoned orchards. Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that managed orchards had a similar species richness of butterflies and burnet moths to abandoned orchards. One controlled study in the USA found that an unmanaged and a partially managed orchard had a greater species richness and diversity of leaf-eating arthropods (including caterpillars) than a commercially managed orchard. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that managed orchards had a lower abundance of butterflies and burnet moths than abandoned orchards. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3917https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3917Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:04:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase crop diversity across a farm or farmed landscape Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of increasing crop diversity across a farm or farmed landscape. Both studies were in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in Switzerland found that farms and landscapes with a greater number of habitats or crop types had a similar species richness of butterflies to farms and landscapes with fewer different habitats or crop types. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a greater number of habitats had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with fewer different habitats. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3921https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3921Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:45:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncropped, cultivated margins or plots Four studies evaluated the effects of leaving uncropped, cultivated margins or plots on butterflies and moths. Three were in the UK and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two of three replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study, one replicated, randomized, site comparison study, and one site comparison study) in the UK and Switzerland found that farms managed under agri-environment schemes, or with a greater area of in-field agri-environment scheme options, both including uncropped cultivated margins, had a similar species richness of butterflies and moths to conventional farms or farms with a smaller area of in-field options. The other study found that fields with wider margins between crops had higher butterfly species richness in one of two years. POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the UK found that fields with wider margins between crops had a higher abundance of butterflies in one of two years. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the UK found that farms managed under agri-environment schemes (AES), including uncropped cultivated margins, had a higher abundance of butterflies and micro-moths, but a similar abundance of other moths, compared to conventionally managed farms. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that farms managed with enhanced AES options, including uncropped, cultivated margins, had a higher abundance of some butterflies, but a lower abundance of other butterflies, than farms with simpler AES management. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms with a larger area of in-field AES options, including uncropped, cultivated plots, had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with a smaller area of in-field AES options. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3923https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3923Thu, 11 Aug 2022 16:56:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave unharvested crop headlands within arable fields One study evaluated the effects of leaving unharvested crop headlands within arable fields. This study was in France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in France found that unharvested alfalfa headlands had a greater species richness of butterflies than harvested alfalfa or wheat fields. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in France found that unharvested alfalfa headlands had a higher abundance of butterflies than harvested alfalfa or wheat fields. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3924https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3924Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:02:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain or create bare ground Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of maintaining or creating bare ground. Two studies were in the UK, and one was in each of the Netherlands and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that after 1–2 years, grass field margins disked to create bare ground had a similar species richness of both grassland butterflies and disturbance-tolerant butterflies to undisturbed margins. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that after 1–2 years, grass field margins disked to create bare ground had a higher abundance of disturbance-tolerant, but not grassland, butterflies to undisturbed margins. One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that Alcon large blue occupied a similar proportion of heathlands managed with sod cutting and unmanaged heathlands. However, the same study found that Alcon large blues were less likely to occur on heathlands where sod cutting and grazing were used together. One site comparison study in the UK found that a sand dune plot which had been stripped of turf and soil supported a translocated population of belted beauty moths, but a plot which had been strimmed and raked did not. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the UK reported that 2-3 years after bare ground plots were created, some were used by caterpillars or adult moths of one or more of the grey carpet, lunar yellow underwing, forester and marbled clover, but none by the basil thyme case-bearer. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3935https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3935Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:53:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage heathland by cutting Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing heathland by cutting. Two studies were in the USA1,2 and one was in the UK3. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One site comparison study in the USA2 found that a pine barren managed for 13 years by mechanical cutting had a higher abundance of Karner blue butterflies than barrens managed by rotational burning or unburned refuges. One before-and-after study in the USA1 found that the abundance of five butterfly species did not change after the management of a pine barren was changed from rotational burning to unintensive cutting. One before-and-after study in the UK3 reported that the abundance of high brown fritillary and small pearl-bordered fritillary increased after scrub cutting, along with tree felling, coppicing and grazing. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3947https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3947Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:59:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install artificial dams in streams to raise water levels One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of installing artificial dams in streams to raise water levels. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the USA found that installing artificial dams in streams did not increase the survival of Appalachian brown butterfly eggs, caterpillars or pupae. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3954https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3954Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:22:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase grazing intensity or cutting frequency on grassland Five studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of increasing grazing intensity or cutting frequency on grassland. Two studies were in Germany, and one study was in each of the Czech Republic, the USA and Israel. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that at intensively grazed sites species richness of adult butterflies and burnet moths was lower than at sites with low or no grazing, but caterpillar richness was lower in intensively grazed and low grazing sites than in sites with no grazing. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Four studies (including one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study, one replicated, site comparison study, and two site comparison studies) in Germany, the USA and Israel found that grasslands managed with more intensive grazing or with grazing in addition to rotational burning had a lower abundance of all adult butterflies, adult burnet moths, adult regal fritillaries and spring webworm caterpillar nests than ungrazed grasslands, lightly or moderately grazed grasslands or rotationally burned grasslands with occasional light grazing. However, one of these studies found that, while intensively grazed sites had lower butterfly and burnet moth caterpillar abundance than ungrazed sites, there was no difference in caterpillar abundance between ungrazed and lightly grazed sites. One before-and-after study in the Czech Republic reported that after increasing the cutting frequency on traditional meadows (under agri-environment scheme prescriptions) the abundance of Danube clouded yellow decreased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3962https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3962Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:37:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain or restore traditional water meadows and bogs Five studies evaluated the effect on butterflies and moths of maintaining or restoring traditional water meadows and bogs. Two studies were in the UK and one was in each of Germany, Belgium and Poland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that the species richness of butterflies was similar in wet meadows managed by mowing once/year in autumn, or by light grazing with cattle or horses. POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): One of two replicated, before-and-after studies in Belgium and Poland found that after cattle grazing on wet grassland began, the number of bog fritillaries which emerged on grazed areas was lower than before grazing started. The other study reported that after trees and shrubs were removed from wet meadows, the number of marsh fritillary caterpillar webs increased the following year. One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that the abundance of butterflies was similar in wet meadows managed by mowing once/year in autumn, or by light grazing with cattle or horses. One site comparison study in the UK found that wet grassland grazed at an intermediate intensity by cattle had a higher abundance of marsh fritillary caterpillar webs, but a similar abundance of adults, to grassland grazed at high or low intensity. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One replicated, before-and-after study in Belgium found that after cattle grazing on wet grassland began, the use of the grazed areas by bog fritillaries was lower than before grazing started. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that a similar proportion of fen meadows were occupied by marsh fritillary caterpillars whether they were managed by grazing (with cattle, sheep or horses), burning or were unmanaged. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3971https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3971Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:39:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain or restore native wood pasture and parkland We found no studies that evaluated the effects of maintaining or restoring native wood pasture and parkland 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%2F3972https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3972Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:40:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain upland heath/moorland Three studies evaluated the effects of maintaining upland heath/moorland on butterflies and moths. All three studies were in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that lightly grazed or ungrazed upland acid grassland had a higher species richness of moths than commercially grazed grassland. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Three controlled studies (including two replicated, randomized studies) in the UK found that ungrazed, lightly grazed or summer grazed upland grassland had a higher abundance of adult moths, moth caterpillars and all caterpillars than grassland grazed at commercial stocking densities or all year round. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3973https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3973Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:40:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage hedgerows to benefit wildlife (e.g. no spray, gap-filling and laying) Seventeen studies evaluated the effects of managing hedgerows to benefit wildlife on butterflies and moths. Fourteen studies were in the UK, and one was in each of Belgium, Costa Rica and Italy. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (9 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (9 studies): Three replicated, site comparison studies in the UK and Costa Rica found that hedgerows with trees or a more complex structure had a higher species richness or diversity of butterflies and macro-moths than simpler hedgerows without trees. Three of six replicated studies (including three randomized, paired, controlled studies, one randomized, site comparison, and two site comparison studies) in the UK and Italy found that hedgerows cut to allow incremental growth had a higher diversity of caterpillars and pupae than hedgerows cut to the same size, that hedgerows kept between 1–2 m tall had a higher species richness of butterflies than hedgerows kept below 1 m tall and that fields with hedgerows of a larger volume had higher species richness of butterflies than those with hedgerows of a smaller volume, but only in one of two study years. The other three studies found that hedgerows managed according to agri-environment scheme prescriptions (including less frequent or winter cutting, gap-filling and restricted mowing, in one case in combination with other agri-environment scheme habitat) had a similar species richness of butterflies and moths to conventionally managed hedgerows. POPULATION RESPONSE (17 STUDIES) Abundance (17 studies): Four of six replicated studies (including four randomized, paired, controlled studies, one controlled study, and one paired, site comparison study) in the UK found that hedgerows cut once every 2–3 years, cut in autumn, or cut to allow incremental growth, had a higher abundance of adult butterflies and moths, moth caterpillars and pupae and brown hairstreak eggs than hedgerows cut to the same size every winter. However, one of these studies also found that hedgerows cut to allow incremental growth had a similar abundance of moth caterpillars and pupae to hedgerows cut to the same size. The other two studies found that hedgerows managed by gap-filling and cutting every three years had a similar abundance of moths to conventionally managed hedgerows, and that hedgerows cut in winter, or less frequently in autumn, had more concealed moth caterpillars, but a similar abundance of free-living caterpillars, to hedgerows cut annually in autumn. Three of five replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the UK and Costa Rica found that hedgerows with trees had a similar total abundance of macro-moths to hedgerows without trees. The other two studies found that hedgerows with trees, or with a more complex structure, had a higher abundance of butterflies and pale shining brown moths than simple hedgerows. Two replicated, site comparison studies in Belgium and Italy found that hedgerows managed with scalloped edges, or maintained at below 1 m tall, had more brown hairstreak eggs and a higher abundance of adult butterflies, than hedgerows with straight edges or allowed to grow over 2 m tall. One of two studies (including one controlled and one replicated, site comparison study) in the UK found that laid or coppiced hedgerows had a higher abundance of butterflies than unmanaged hedgerows. The other study found that managed hedgerows had a lower abundance of caterpillars than remnant hedgerows. One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the UK found that butterfly abundance was higher in fields with hedgerows of a larger volume, but only in one of two study years. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that field margins next to hedgerow trees had a higher abundance of most shrub- and tree-feeding, but not grass- and herb-feeding, moth species than margins away from hedgerow trees. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3975https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3975Thu, 18 Aug 2022 09:18:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage ditches to benefit butterflies and moths We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing ditches to benefit 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%2F3977https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3977Thu, 18 Aug 2022 10:39:00 +0100