Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Trapping and removal One controlled, replicated study in Italy found that baiting traps with food (tinned meat) trapped the most red swamp crayfish compared to the use of male and female pheromones or the control (no bait). Over half of all crayfish caught were found in traps baited with food. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1029https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1029Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:14:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Trapping combined with encouragement of predators A before-and-after study in Switzerland found that introducing predators, combined with trapping significantly reduced red swamp crayfish populations in a pond. A second replicated, controlled study from Italy demonstrated that trapping and predation in combination was more effective at reducing red swamp crayfish populations than predation alone. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1031https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1031Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:16:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Sterilization of males One replicated laboratory study in Italy found that exposing male red swamp crayfish to X-rays reduced the number of offspring they produced by 43%. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1032https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1032Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:16:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Procambarus crayfish control: Remove the crayfish by electrofishing No evidence was captured on the effect of electrofishing as a control tool for Procambarus crayfish. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1035https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1035Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:17:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Red-eared terrapin: Direct removal of adults A replicated field study in Spain found that Aranzadi turtle traps were effective in trapping red-eared terrapins from a river but did not eradicate the population. A study in the British Virgin Islands found that using sein nets to trap adults and juveniles was not successful in eradicating the population. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1055https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1055Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:56:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Red-eared terrapin: Biological control using native predators No evidence was captured on the use of predators to control invasive terrapin populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1056https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1056Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:58:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Red-eared terrapin: Draining invaded waterbodies No evidence was captured on the impact of draining invaded waterbodies on reduction of red-eared terrapin populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1057https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1057Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:00:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Red-eared terrapin: Search and removal using sniffer dogs No evidence was captured on the success of use of sniffer dogs in removing red-eared terrapins. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1058https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1058Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:02:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Red-eared terrapin: Application of a biocide One replicated, controlled laboratory study in the USA, found that application of glyphosate to the eggs of red-eared terrapins reduced hatching success to 73%, but only at the highest experimental concentration of glyphosate and a surface active agent. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1059https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1059Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:05:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Red-eared terrapin: Public education No evidence was captured on the impact of education programmes on reduction of red-eared terrapin populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1060https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1060Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:06:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Biological control using co-evolved, host specific herbivores No evidence was captured on biological control of skunk cabbage using co-evolved, host specific herbivores. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1098https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1098Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:05:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Biological control using native herbivores No evidence was captured on biological control of skunk cabbage using native herbivores. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1099https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1099Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:07:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Biological control using fungal-based herbicides No evidence was captured on biological control of skunk cabbage using fungal-based herbicides. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1100https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1100Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:08:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Physical removal A study in Switzerland found that annual physical removal of recently established skunk cabbage plants over five years removed the entire stock. A study in the Netherlands found that manual removal of mature skunk cabbage plants was effective for a small outbreak of a small-growing plant. A study in Germany reported that after the first four years of a twice yearly full removal programme of skunk cabbage, a large number of plants still needed to be removed each year. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1101https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1101Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:11:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Chemical control using herbicides A study in the UK found that two herbicides, glyphosate and 2, 4-D Amine, both killed all skunk cabbage plants in test areas. However, another study in the UK found that although using 2,4-D amine at 9 litres/ha, successfully eradicated skunk cabbage, using glyphosate was unsuccessful at eradicating skunk cabbage, with only limited reduction in growth of the plants. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1102https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1102Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:18:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Combination treatment using herbicides and physical removal No evidence was found for use of combination treatment using herbicides and physical removal to control skunk cabbage. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1103https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1103Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:27:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of hydrogen peroxide No evidence was found for use of hydrogen peroxide to control skunk cabbage. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1104https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1104Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:28:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of liquid nitrogen No evidence was found for use of liquid nitrogen to control skunk cabbage. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1105https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1105Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:29:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of flame treatment No evidence was found for use of flame treatment to control skunk cabbage. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1106https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1106Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:30:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Use of a tarpaulin No evidence was found for use of a tarpaulin to control skunk cabbage. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1107https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1107Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:31:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Environmental control (e.g. shading, or promotion of native plants) No evidence was captured on the use of environmental control of skunk cabbage using shading or promotion of competitive native plants. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1108https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1108Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:32:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Skunk cabbage: Public education No evidence was captured on the impact of public education programmes on control of skunk cabbage. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1109https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1109Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:33:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Water primrose: Biological control using co-evolved, host specific herbivores A controlled, replicated field study in China, found a flea beetle caused heavy feeding destruction when added to field cages containing prostrate water primrose seedlings, and was specific to the prostrate water primrose and Indian toothcup. A replicated, before-and-after field study in the USA found that introduction of flea beetles to a pond significantly reduced the abundance of large-flower primrose-willow. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1135https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1135Tue, 13 Oct 2015 16:03:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Water primrose: Biological control using native herbivores No evidence was found on the use of biological control of water primrose using native herbivores. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1136https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1136Tue, 13 Oct 2015 16:07:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Water primrose: Biological control using fungal-based herbicides No evidence was found on the use of biological control of water primrose using fungal-based herbicides. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1137https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1137Tue, 13 Oct 2015 16:09:02 +0100