Sow seeds and plant individual plants

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    10%
  • Certainty
    10%
  • Harms
    0%

Source countries

Key messages

  • One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that planting California sagebrush and sowing of seeds did not increase cover of native plant species compared to sowing of seeds, or planting alone.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, randomized, controlled study in a degraded sagebrush scrubland habitat in California, USA (1) found that planting California sagebrush Artemisia californica plants followed by sowing of seeds did not increase cover of native plant species compared to only sowing of seeds, or only planting. Native plant species cover in areas where California sagebrush was planted and seeds were sown (7–14%) was not higher than areas where either seeds were sown (2–9%) or California sagebrush plants were planted (2%). California sagebrush plants were planted in six randomly located 1 m2 plots which were then sown with seeds, while six plots were only sown with seeds of shrubland plants, and another six plots were only planted with California sagebrush plants. Plant cover was recorded 1 m2 plots, every year between May and July. Year of the study is not provided.

    DeSimone, S.A. (2011) Balancing Active and Passive Restoration in a Nonchemical, Research-Based Approach to Coastal Sage Scrub Restoration in Southern California. Ecological Restoration, 29, 45-51.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Martin P.A., Rocha R., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2018) Shrubland and Heathland Conservation. Pages 447-494 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2018. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Shrubland and Heathland Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Shrubland and Heathland Conservation
Shrubland and Heathland Conservation

Shrubland and Heathland Conservation - Published 2017

Shrubland and Heathland synopsis

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation assesses the research looking at whether interventions are beneficial or not. It is based on summarised evidence in synopses, on topics such as amphibians, bats, biodiversity in European farmland, and control of freshwater invasive species. More are available and in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
Our Journal: Conservation Evidence

Our Journal:
Conservation Evidence

A unique, free to publish open-access journal publishing research and case studies that measure the effects of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 16

Special issues: Amphibian special issue

Go to the Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust