Version classiqueVersion mobile

What Works in Conservation 2017

 | 
William J. Sutherland
, 
Lynn V. Dicks
, 
Nancy Ockendon
, 
et al.

1. AMPHIBIAN CONSERVATION

1.10 Threat: Climate change and severe weather

Texte intégral

Based on the collated evidence, what is the current assessment of the effectiveness of interventions for climate change and severe weather?

Beneficial

● Deepen ponds to prevent desiccation (deepen, de-silt or re-profile)

Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)

● Use irrigation systems for amphibian sites (artificially mist habitat)

No evidence found (no assessment)

● Artificially shade ponds to prevent desiccation
● Protect habitat along elevational gradients
● Provide shelter habitat

Create microclimate and microhabitat refuges

1Studies investigating the effects of creating refuges are discussed in ‘Habitat restoration and creation’ and ‘Threat: Biological resource use — Leave coarse woody debris in forests’.

Maintain ephemeral ponds

2Studies investigating the effects of regulating water levels and deepening ponds are discussed in ‘Threat: Natural system modifications — Regulate water levels’ and ‘Habitat restoration and creation — Deepen, de-silt or re-profile ponds’.

Beneficial

Deepen ponds to prevent desiccation

3Four studies, including one replicated, controlled study, in France, Denmark and the UK found that pond deepening and enlarging or re-profiling resulted in establishment or increased populations of amphibians. Four before-and-after studies in Denmark and the UK found that pond deepening, along with other interventions, maintained newt or increased toad populations. Assessment for ‘Deepen, de-silt or re-profie ponds’ from ‘Habitat restoration and creation’ section: beneficial (effectiveness 71%; certainty 65%; harms 0%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​806

Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)

Use irrigation systems for amphibian sites

4One before-and-after study in Tanzania found that installing a sprinkler system to mitigate against a reduction of river flow did not maintain a population of Kihansi spray toads. Assessment for ‘Artificially mist habitat to keep it damp’ from ‘Threat: Energy production and mining’ section: unknown effectiveness — limited evidence (effectiveness 24%; certainty 20%; harms 0%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​804

No evidence found (no assessment)

5We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Artificially shade ponds to prevent desiccation

  • Protect habitat along elevational gradients

  • Provide shelter habitat

Lire

Open access

Acheter

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search