The cascading impacts of livestock grazing in upland ecosystems: a 10-year experiment

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank The Woodland Trust, Scotland for permission to use the Glen Finglas Estate. Sally Burgess, Timothy Conner, Charlie Gardner, Ian Joyce,Fi Leckie, Elaine McEwan, Ruth Mitchell, Gabor Pozsgai, Gina Prior and others assisted with the collection and sorting of samples at different stages of the project. S. M. Redpath, R. J. Pakeman, P. Dennis and D. M. Evans designed the study; D. M. Evans, N.Villar, N. A. Littlewood, S. A. Evans and J. Skartveit collected the data; D. M. Evans and N. Villar analyzed the data; D. M. Evans and N. Villar co-wrote as joint-first authors the first draft of the manuscript, and all authors contributed substantially to revisions.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Use of a novel camera trapping approach to measure small mammal responses to peatland restoration

Funder: Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100011310AbstractSmall mammals, such as small rodents (Rodentia: Muroidea) and shrews (Insectivora: Soricidae), present particular challenges in camera trap surveys. Their size is often insufficient to trigger infra-red sensors, whilst resultant images may be of inadequate quality for species identification. The conventional survey method for small mammals, live-trapping, can be both labour-intensive and detrimental to animal welfare. Here, we describe a method for using camera traps for monitoring small mammals. We show that by attaching the camera trap to a baited tunnel, fixing a close-focus lens over the camera trap lens, and reducing the flash intensity, pictures or videos can be obtained of sufficient quality for identifying species. We demonstrate the use of the method by comparing occurrences of small mammals in a peatland landscape containing (i) plantation forestry (planted on drained former blanket bog), (ii) ex-forestry areas undergoing bog restoration, and (iii) unmodified blanket bog habitat. Rodents were detected only in forestry and restoration areas, whilst shrews were detected across all habitat. The odds of detecting small mammals were 7.6 times higher on camera traps set in plantation forestry than in unmodified bog, and 3.7 times higher on camera traps in restoration areas than in bog. When absolute abundance estimates are not required, and camera traps are available, this technique provides a low-cost survey method that is labour-efficient and has minimal animal welfare implications.</jats:p

Cumulative impact assessments of multiple host species loss from plant diseases show disproportionate reductions in associated biodiversity

Funding Information: This work was funded by BBSRC grant Protecting Oak Ecosystems (PuRpOsE): BB/N022831/1 with additional funding from the Scottish Government's Rural and Environment Research and Analysis Directorate 2016–2021 strategic research programme. The authors thank Nick Hodgetts for collating the lists of the bryophyte species associated with ash and oak, Ralph Harmer for conducting some of the site visits and the site owners for allowing us access to the sites. Katharine Preedy provided statistical advice. Steve Albon and Robin Pakeman kindly provided comments to improve earlier drafts.Peer reviewe

Cumulative impact assessments of multiple host species loss from plant diseases show disproportionate reductions in associated biodiversity

Non-native plant pests and pathogens are increasing exponentially, causing extirpation of foundation species. The impact of large-scale declines in a single host on associated biodiversity is widely documented. However, the impact of multiple host loss on biodiversity and whether these impacts are multiplicative has not been assessed. Ecological theory suggests that systems with greater functional redundancy (alternative hosts) will be more resilient to the loss of sympatric hosts. We test this theory and show its importance in relation to pest/pathogen impact assessments. We assessed the potential impact on biodiversity of the loss of two widely occurring sympatric European tree species, Fraxinus excelsior and Quercus petraea/robur, both of which are currently threatened by a range of pests and pathogens. At the UK scale, the total number of associated species at risk of extirpation from plant diseases affecting these two sympatric hosts is greater than the sum of the associated species at risk from declines in either host alone. F. excelsior hosts 45 obligate species (species only found on that host) and Q. petraea/robur hosts 326. However, a decline in both these trees would impact 512 associated species, across multiple taxon groups, a 38% increase. Assessments at a local scale, 24 mixed F. excelsior–Q. petraea/robur woodlands revealed that these impacts may be even greater due to a lack of functional redundancy. Only 21% of sites were able to provide functional redundancy for F. excelsior and Q. petraea/robur associated species which can use other tree species. In most woodlands, the tree species required to provide functional redundancy were not present, although the site conditions were often suitable for them to grow. Synthesis. Understanding of functional redundancy should be applied to assessments of pests/pathogens impact on biodiversity. In risk assessments, higher impact scores should be given to pests/pathogens affecting hosts occurring with other host plant species already impacted by pests/pathogens. Current pest/pathogen risk assessment approaches that ignore the cumulative, cascading effects shown in this study may allow an insidious, mostly overlooked, driver of biodiversity loss to continue.Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, Grant/Award Number: BB/N022831/1; Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

"Terrestrial Mammal Conservation provides a thorough summary of the available scientific evidence of what is known, or not known, about the effectiveness of all of the conservation actions for wild terrestrial mammals across the world (excluding bats and primates, which are covered in separate synopses). Actions are organized into categories based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature classifications of direct threats and conservation actions. Over the course of fifteen chapters, the authors consider interventions as wide ranging as creating uncultivated margins around fields, prescribed burning, setting hunting quotas and removing non-native mammals. This book is written in an accessible style and is designed to be an invaluable resource for anyone concerned with the practical conservation of terrestrial mammals. The authors consulted an international group of terrestrial mammal experts and conservationists to produce this synopsis. Funding was provided by the MAVA Foundation, Arcadia and National Geographic Big Cats Initiative. Terrestrial Mammal Conservation is the seventeenth publication in the Conservation Evidence Series, linked to the online resource www.ConservationEvidence.com. Conservation Evidence Synopses are designed to promote a more evidence-based approach to biodiversity conservation. Others in the series include Bat Conservation, Primate Conservation, Bird Conservation and Forest Conservation and more are in preparation. Expert assessment of the evidence summarised within synopses is provided online and within the annual publication What Works in Conservation.

Reducing publication delay to improve the efficiency and impact of conservation science.

Evidence-based decision-making is most effective with comprehensive access to scientific studies. If studies face significant publication delays or barriers, the useful information they contain may not reach decision-makers in a timely manner. This represents a potential problem for mission-oriented disciplines where access to the latest data is required to ensure effective actions are undertaken. We sought to analyse the severity of publication delay in conservation science-a field that requires urgent action to prevent the loss of biodiversity. We used the Conservation Evidence database to assess the length of publication delay (time from finishing data collection to publication) in the literature that tests the effectiveness of conservation interventions. From 7,447 peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed studies of conservation interventions published over eleven decades, we find that the raw mean publication delay was 3.2 years (±2SD = 0.1) and varied by conservation subject. A significantly shorter delay was observed for studies focused on Bee Conservation, Sustainable Aquaculture, Management of Captive Animals, Amphibian Conservation, and Control of Freshwater Invasive Species (Estimated Marginal Mean range from 1.4-1.9 years). Publication delay was significantly shorter for the non-peer-reviewed literature (Estimated Marginal Mean delay of 1.9 years ± 0.2) compared to the peer-reviewed literature (i.e., scientific journals; Estimated Marginal Mean delay of 3.0 years ± 0.1). We found publication delay has significantly increased over time (an increase of ~1.2 years from 1912 (1.4 years ± 0.2) to 2020 (2.6 years ± 0.1)), but this change was much weaker and non-significant post-2000s; we found no evidence for any decline. There was also no evidence that studies on more threatened species were subject to a shorter delay-indeed, the contrary was true for mammals, and to a lesser extent for birds. We suggest a range of possible ways in which scientists, funders, publishers, and practitioners can work together to reduce delays at each stage of the publication process

Irreproducibility in searches of scientific literature: A comparative analysis.

Repeatability is the cornerstone of science, and it is particularly important for systematic reviews. However, little is known on how researchers' choice of database, and search platform influence the repeatability of systematic reviews. Here, we aim to unveil how the computer environment and the location where the search was initiated from influence hit results.We present a comparative analysis of time-synchronized searches at different institutional locations in the world and evaluate the consistency of hits obtained within each of the search terms using different search platforms.We revealed a large variation among search platforms and showed that PubMed and Scopus returned consistent results to identical search strings from different locations. Google Scholar and Web of Science's Core Collection varied substantially both in the number of returned hits and in the list of individual articles depending on the search location and computing environment. Inconsistency in Web of Science results has most likely emerged from the different licensing packages at different institutions.To maintain scientific integrity and consistency, especially in systematic reviews, action is needed from both the scientific community and scientific search platforms to increase search consistency. Researchers are encouraged to report the search location and the databases used for systematic reviews, and database providers should make search algorithms transparent and revise access rules to titles behind paywalls. Additional options for increasing the repeatability and transparency of systematic reviews are storing both search metadata and hit results in open repositories and using Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) to retrieve standardized, machine-readable search metadata

Creating testable questions in practical conservation: a process and 100 questions

It is now clear that the routine embedding of experiments into conservation practice is essential for creating reasonably comprehensive evidence of the effectiveness of actions. However, an important barrier is the stage of identifying testable questions that are both useful but also realistic to carry out without a major research project. We identified approaches for generating such suitable questions. A team of 24 participants crowdsourced suggestions, resulting in a list of a hundred possible tests of actions.Additional co-authors: Roger Mitchell, William H. Morgan, Roy Mosley, Silviu O. Petrovan, Kit Prendergast, Euan G. Ritchie, Hugh Raven, Rebecca K. Smith & Ann Thornto

Creating testable questions in practical conservation: a process and 100 questions

It is now clear that the routine embedding of experiments into conservation practice is essential for creating reasonably comprehensive evidence of the effectiveness of actions. However, an important barrier is the stage of identifying testable questions that are both useful but also realistic to carry out without a major research project. We identified approaches for generating such suitable questions. A team of 24 participants crowdsourced suggestions, resulting in a list of a hundred possible tests of actions