Action

Cover peatland with something other than mulch (without planting)

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    40%
  • Certainty
    30%
  • Harms
    5%

Source countries

Key messages

  • Two studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of covering a peatland with something other than mulch (without planting). Both studies were in bogs.
  • Vegetation cover (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Germany reported that covering bare peat with fleece or fibre mats did not affect the number of seedlings of five herb/shrub species. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in bogs in Australia reported that recently-burned plots shaded with plastic mesh developed greater cover of native plants, forbs and Sphagnum moss than unshaded plots.

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, controlled, before-and-after study in 1993–1995 in a historically mined raised bog in Germany (Sliva et al. 1999) reported that covering plots with fleece or fibre mat did not affect seedling numbers for five plant species. These results were not tested for statistical significance. After 1–2 years, covered and uncovered plots contained a similar number of seedlings. There were 3 seedlings/400 cm2 for purple moor grass Molinia caerulea. There was <1 seedling/400 cm2 for four other species: beaked sedge Carex rostrata, common cottongrass Eriophorum angustifolium, sheathed cottongrass Eriophorum vaginatum and heather Calluna vulgaris. In autumn 1993, fifteen 1 m2 plots were established on bare rewetted peat (mined until 1986). Five plots were covered with synthetic fleece, five were covered with wide-meshed jute fibre mat and five were not covered. No seeds were added to these plots. Covers were removed and seedlings counted in summer 1994 (two plots/treatment) and 1995 (three plots/treatment).

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in 2003–2007 in two in Australia (Whinam et al. 2010) found that plots shaded with plastic mesh developed greater vegetation cover than unshaded plots. After 40 months, shaded plots had significantly greater cover of native plants in general, and of forbs, than unshaded plots (data not reported). Sphagnum moss cover was 10% in shaded plots compared to 8% in unshaded plots (difference not tested for statistical significance). Immediately before shading, plots had 3% Sphagnum cover on average. In January 2003, the focal bogs were burned by a wild fire. In October 2003, ten burned plots (3 x 15 m; five plots/bog) were shaded with plastic mesh (blocking 70% of incoming light). Fifteen additional plots were left uncovered. Vegetation cover was recorded in 0.25 m2 quadrats: five/bog in October 2003, and one/plot in March 2007.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Taylor N.G., Grillas P. & Sutherland W.J. (2019) Peatland Conservation. Pages 375-438 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2019. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Peatland Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Peatland Conservation
Peatland Conservation

Peatland Conservation - Published 2018

Peatland Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE 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 some of 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