Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use wire fences within grazing areas to exclude livestock from specific forest sections Four of eight studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Israel, New Zealand, Spain, West Africa and the USA found that excluding livestock using wire fences increased biomass , species richness, density and cover of understory plants. The other four studies found mixed effects or no effect of livestock exclusion on understory plants. Three of four studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study) in Mexico, Kenya, Israel and Panama found that excluding livestock using wire fences increased the size and density of regenerating trees and the number of regenerating trees. One study found livestock exclusion decreased tree density but not tree size. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1205https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1205Thu, 19 May 2016 13:44:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees within forests: effects on mature trees Eleven of 12 studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Brazil, Canada, and the USA found that thinning trees in forests decreased the density and cover of trees. One study found no effect of thinning on tree density. Five of six studies (including one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study) in Australia, Sweden and the USA found that thinning trees in forests increased tree size. One found mixed effects of thinning on tree size. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that thinning trees in forests decreased tree species richness and diversity. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that thinning reduced the number of conifers killed by beetles. Two replicated, controlled studies in the USA found no effect of thinning on bark-beetle caused tree mortality. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1209https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1209Thu, 19 May 2016 15:02:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees within forests: effects on young trees Six of twelve studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Japan and the USA found that thinning trees in forests increased the density of young trees. One study found that thinning decreased the density of young trees. Five found no effect or mixed effects on the density of young trees. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found no effect of thinning on the density of oak acorns. One controlled study in Peru found that thinning increased the growth rate of young trees. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1210https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1210Thu, 19 May 2016 15:49:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees within forests: effects on understory plants Seventeen of 25 studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Spain and the USA found that thinning trees in forests increased the density and cover of understory plants. Seven studies found no effect or mixed effects. One study found a decrease in the abundance of herbaceous species. Thirteen of 19 studies (including 10 replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Argentina, Canada, Sweden, the USA and West Africa found that thinning trees in forests increased species richness and diversity of understory plants. Seven studies found no effect. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1211https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1211Fri, 20 May 2016 08:24:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove woody debris after timber harvest One of six studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in the USA and France found that woody debris removal increased understory vegetation cover. Three studies found no effect or mixed effects on cover. Four of the studies found no effect or mixed effects on understory vegetation species richness and diversity and two found no effect of woody debris removal on coverand species diversity of trees. Six studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Canada, Ethiopia, Spain and the USA examined the effect of woody debris removal on young trees. One study found that debris removal increased young tree density, another study found that it decreased young tree density, and three studies found mixed effects or no effect on young tree density. One found no effect of woody-debris removal on young tree survival. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1213https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1213Fri, 20 May 2016 13:32:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire: effects on mature trees Four of eight studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from the USA found that prescribed fire decreased tree cover, density and diversity. One study found it increased tree cover and three found no effect or mixed effects of prescribed fire on cover and density of trees. Seven studies from the USA (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study) found that prescribed fire increased tree mortality. One of three studies from the USA (including one replicated, controlled study) found that prescribed fire increased tree size while two found no effect of prescribed fire on tree size. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1217https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1217Fri, 20 May 2016 14:09:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire: effects on young trees Five of 15 studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from Canada, France and the USA found that prescribed fire increased the density and biomass of young trees. Two studies found that fire decreased new tree density. Eight found no effect or mixed effects depending on the tree species, location and fire frequency. Two of the above studies found mixed effects of prescribed fire on species diversity of young trees depending on the location. Two replicated, controlled studies from the USA found mixed effects of prescribed fire on the survival of young trees. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1220https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1220Fri, 20 May 2016 14:45:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire: effect on understory plants Eight of 22 studies (including seven replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from the USA, Australia and Canada found that prescribed fire increased the cover, density and biomass of understory plants. Six of the studies found it decreased plant cover. Eight found no effect or mixed effects on cover and density of understory plants. Fourteen of 24 studies (including ten replicated, randomized, controlled studies) from the USA, Australia, France and West Africa found that prescribed fire increased species richness and diversity of understory plants. One study found that it decreased species richness. Nine found no effect or mixed effects on species richness and diversity of understory plants. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1221https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1221Mon, 23 May 2016 08:21:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use clearcutting to increase understory diversity Eight of 12 studies (including three replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Israel, spain and the USA found that clearcutting increased the cover and species richness of understory plants. Two found it decreased the density and species richness, and two found no effect or mixed effects. Three of six studies (including five replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Brazil, Canada and Spain found that clearcutting increased the density and species richness of young trees. One found it decreased new tree density and two found no effect or mixed effects depending on the tree species. Three of nine studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Australia, Brazil4, Canada, Japan and the USA found that clearcutting decreased density, species richness and diversity of mature trees. One study found it increased trees species richness .Six studies found no effect or mixed effects on tree density, size and species richness and diversity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1222https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1222Mon, 23 May 2016 08:58:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelterwood harvesting Six of seven studies (including five replicated, controlled studies) in Australia, Iran, Nepal and the USA found that shelterwood harvesting increased abundance, species richness and diversity of understory plants, as well as the growth and survival rate of young trees. One study found shelterwood harvesting decreased plant species richness and abundance. One study found no effect of shelterwood harvest on tree abundance. One replicated, controlled study in Canada found no effect of shelterwood harvest on red oak acorn production. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1223https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1223Mon, 23 May 2016 09:34:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use group-selection harvesting Four of eight studies (including one replicated, controlled study) in Australia, Canada, Costa Rica and the USA found that group-selection harvesting increased cover and diversity of understory plants and the density of young trees. Two studies found it decreased understory species richness2 and biomass.Two studies found no effect on understory species richness and diversity and two found no effect of group-selection harvest on tree density and growth-rate. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1224https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1224Mon, 23 May 2016 09:45:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use thinning followed by prescribed fire Three of six studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study) in the USA found that thinning followed by prescribed burning increased cover and abundance1 of understory plants as well as the density of deciduous trees. One study found that thinning then burning decreased trees density and species richness. Three studies found no effect or mixed effects of thinning followed by burning on tree growth rate and density of young trees. One replicated, controlled study Australia found no effect of thinning followed by burning on the genetic diversity of black ash. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1227https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1227Mon, 23 May 2016 10:38:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use wire fencing to exclude large native herbivores Five of ten studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Australia, Bhutan, Canada, France, Portugal and the USA found that using wire fencing to exclude large herbivores increased the cover and size of understory plants. Six studies found no effect of wire fencing on the cover, seed density, species richness or diversity of understory plants. Two of the above studies and one paired-sites study in Ireland examined the effect of using wire fencing to exclude large herbivores on young trees. One found it increased the biomass, one found it decreased the density of young trees and one found mixed effects depending on the species. Two replicated, controlled studies in the USA found that using wire fencing to exclude large herbivores increased tree density. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1230https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1230Mon, 23 May 2016 10:55:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees after wildfire Five replicated, controlled studies examined the effects of thinning trees in burnt forest areas. Two studies in Spain found that thinning increased plant species richness. One in Canada found that it increased the cover of aspen saplings. One study in the USA found thinning decreased plant biomass and one in Israel found it decreased mortality of pine seedlings. One paired-site study in Canada found that logging after wildfire decreased species richness and diversity of mosses. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1234https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1234Thu, 02 Jun 2016 14:31:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fertilizer Six of eight studies (including five replicated, randomized, controlled) in the USA, Finland, Brazil, Australia and Switzerland found that applying fertilizer increased total plant cover, understory plant biomass , size of young trees, relative biomass of grasses (out of total biomass of all plants) and cover of plant species that were seeded artificially. Five of the studies found no effect of applying fertilizer on plant biomass, plant cover, seedling abundance, tree growth and tree seedling diversity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1248https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1248Fri, 03 Jun 2016 11:30:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use soil scarification or ploughing to enhance germination Two studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study) in Portugal and the USA found that ploughing increased the cover and diversity of understory plants. Two of three studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled) in Canada and Brazil found that ploughing increased, and one found it decreased the density of young trees. Two replicated, controlled studies in Ethiopia and Sweden found mixed effects of tilling on different tree species. One replicated, before-and-after trial in Finland found that ploughing decreased the cover of plants living on wood surface. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that ploughing did not decrease the spreading distance and density of invasive grass seedlings. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1251https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1251Fri, 03 Jun 2016 13:09:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Mechanically remove understory vegetation after tree planting Five studies (including three replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Canada, the USA, France, Panama and Sweden found no effect of controlling understory vegetation on the emergence, survival, growth rate or frost damage in planted seedlings. However, one found removing competing herbs increased seedling biomass. One replicated, controlled study in Canada found that removal of sheep laurel shrubs increased the growth rate and height of planted black spruce seedlings. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1256https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1256Mon, 06 Jun 2016 09:06:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use mechanical thinning before or after planting Five of six studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Brazil, Canada, Finland, France and the USA found that thinning trees after planting increased survival and size of the planted trees. One study found it decreased their density. One study found that the effects of thinning on the size and survival rate of planted trees varied between species. One replicated study in the USA found that the survival rate of red oak seedlings increased with the size of the thinned area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1261https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1261Mon, 06 Jun 2016 11:04:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prepare the ground before tree planting Six of seven studies (including five replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Canada and Sweden found that ground preparation treatments increased the survival and growth rate of planted trees. One study found no effect of creating mounds on frost damage of planted Norway spruce seedlings. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1263https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1263Mon, 06 Jun 2016 14:23:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use different planting or seeding methods Four studies (including one replicated, randomized study) in Australia, Brazil, Costa Rica and Mexico found no effect of planting or seeding methods on the size and survival rate of seedlings. One replicated, controlled study in Brazil found that planting early succession pioneer tree species decreased the height of other planted species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1264https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1264Mon, 06 Jun 2016 15:01:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Log/remove trees within forests: effects on mature trees Three of seven studies (including two replicated, controlled studies) in Bolivia, Central African Republic, China, Finland, Malaysia, Uganda and the USA found that logging trees in forests decreased the density and cover of trees. Two found it increased tree density and two found no effect of logging on tree density. Three of six studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study) in Bolivia, Canada, China, Kenya, Malaysia and the USA found that logging trees in forests increased tree size. Two found it decreased tree size and one found no effect of logging on tree size. Two of four studies (including one paired site study) in Bolivia, China, Mexico and Papua New Guinea found that logging trees in forests decreased tree species richness and diversity. One study found it increased diversity and one found no effect of logging on tree species diversity. One replicated, controlled study in Canada found that logging trees in forests increased tree mortality rate. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1271https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1271Mon, 13 Jun 2016 08:55:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Log/remove trees within forests: effects on understory plants Five of ten studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Bolivia, Canada, India and the USA found that logging trees in forests increased the density and cover of understory plants. Five studies found no effect or mixed effects. Four of seven studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled study) in Australia, Canada and the USA found that logging trees in forests increased species richness and diversity of understory plants. Three studies found no effect. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1273https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1273Mon, 13 Jun 2016 09:29:47 +0100