Table 4.

Study characteristics.

ReferenceGeographic regionStudy designIntervention typeComparatorFocal biodiversity groupOutcomeSampling methods
Amy et al. (2015) East and SE England; lowland arableRandomised block experiment across 4 sites

Rejuvenation techniques: Midland- style hedgelaying, Conservation hedgelaying, Wildlife hedging, Circular saw re-shaping

Applied randomly to 15m contiguous plots of hedgerows that had received minimal management in the years preceding

2-3 replications per site (dependent on hedge length); n = 10 experimental blocks

Measured foliage biomass, nutrient content and hedge gappiness

Unmanaged control hedgeInvertebrates (general)Abundance (scaled by height of hedge plot)

Plots sampled during May, July and September 2011

Canopy beaten 5 times at intervals of 3m, 6m and 9m along hedge plot

Identified to order/family and assigned as predator, herbivore or detritivore

Leaf samples taken using 3D quadrats (4 per plot) for biomass value. Carbon and Nitrogen content measured from samples of Crataegus monogyna leaves and digital photographs taken for each treatment

Dover et al. (2000) South, NW (England) and Yorkshire; mostly arableReplicated observations; 2 out of 3 sites used for data extraction

Comparisons between green lanes (inside and outside), hedgerows, grass banks and woodland rides

Warburton: 53 sections; grass banks (n = 12), hedgerows (n = 16), outside green lanes (n = 16), inside green lanes (n = 9)

Manydown: Data on field boundaries used from surveys carried out in 1987 and 1988; 1987 – grass banks (n = 3), hedgerows (n = 4); 1988 – grass banks (n = 4), hedgerows (n = 8), woodland rides (n = 15) and green lane (n = 6 sections in both years)

Also took records of adjacent crops, nectar plants, windspeed (4/5 visits) and length of section at Warburton

Grass banks and hedgerows not associated with green lanesButterflies

Abundance

Species richness

Standard transect butterfly recording used at sites; butterflies also recorded as ‘open’ or ‘closed’ population species

Warburton: records made between July-August 1997 on 5 visits

Manydown: records made from 100m length sections between May- September, 13 visits in 1987 and 10 visits in 1988

Facey et al. (2014) East England; Cambridgeshire; assumed arable due to management ‘post-harvest’2 experimental treatments with random factorial design

Cutting frequency: annual, biennial, triennial Timing: post-harvest autumn or winter (Jan/Feb)

3x 200m hedges separated by 50m – in 2005 these were split into n = 32 contiguous plots of 15m each; each 15m plot randomly treated

Replications of the 6 treatment combinations occurred 8 (for annual cutting) or 4 (for biennial/ triennial) times

3m at each plot end not sampled in case of edge effects

Also measured: hedge height and width, foliage biomass, branch length and density, C:N ratio

No control, but replications of treatment combinationsMoths (larvae)

Abundance

Species richness

2 methods:

3 minute search and collection in a 1m x 0.5m quadrat at 1.5m above ground, 5m and 10m along the plot

Hedge beaten 3 times at 0.8m above ground at two locations that weren’t 5m or 10m along the hedge

Larvae divided into free-living or concealed groups and reared to determine parasitism

Range poles used to measure height and width, quadrats used to measure foliage biomass and branch variables. 3x growing and thorn tips and leaf rosettes used to measure C:N

Fuentes- Montemayor et al. (2011) Central Scotland; arable and mixed farmsMatched pairs design; conventional vs AES- implemented farms

18 pairs of AES managed vs conventional farms (arable, n = 7; pastoral = 2; mixed = 9; note – pastoral farm data not extracted)

All pairs have at least 3 of the following features either managed through AES or conventionally managed (Only hedgerow and field margin data were extracted):

Field margins/beetle banks Hedgerows Water management Species-rich grassland

Also measured: landscape analysis

Conventional counterparts for each habitat featureMoths

Abundance

Species richness

Pairs of farms within 8km of each other and had same farming type. Pairs sampled once in 2008 at the same time – minimising weather effects

Moths caught using light traps (3-4 per farm) >=100m apart

122 trap samples: 61 for AES farms, 61 for conventional farms → hedgerows (n = 26), field margins (n = 30)

Landscape analysis using GIS at 3 spatial scales (250m, 500m, 1km) from light trap → classified topography into urban, farmland, water, semi-natural land and woodland

Moonen & Marshall (2001) SW England; WiltshireObservational; 2 matched adjacent sites but with differing management regimes

Noland’s farm:

  •      -      Hedges cut annually

  •      -       Sambucus nigra not removed

  •      -      Hedge bottom cut and treated with herbicides

  •      -      No coppicing or gapping up

  •      -      0.5m sterile strip

  •      -      Granular fertiliser used (spinning disk)

Manor farm:

  •      -      Hedges trimmed in alternate years

  •      -       S. nigra sometimes removed

  •      -      Hedge bottom not cut and local herbicide treatment

  •      -      Some coppicing and gapping up (9 hedges)

  •      -      Sown strips at field edges, 2m or 20m

  •      -      Liquid fertiliser used (no drift)

Comparison between farms; no controlPlants

Abundance – calculated as a % per hedge on each farm

Species richness

25m plots used either side of hedge (each assessed site = 1 relevée)

Hedge bottom, tree layer and shrub layer vegetation assessed using Tansley scale (1 = rare, 5 = dominant) in June 1996

24 environmental variables: boundary structure (n = 5), management (n = 11), adjacent features (n = 8); assessed using RDA and PCA

Noland’s farm → 23 hedgerows (n = 43; 3 relevées not sampled) Manor farm → 37 hedgerows(n = 74)

Total of n = 117 relevées

Pywell et al. (2005) S/C England; Oxfordshire; mostly arableExperimentally replicated across 4 habitats

Mature hedge base (40-60yrs) Newly planted hedge base (2-5yrs) Mature field margin (~50yrs) Newly sown field margin (2-5yrs)

Also measured: dry matter (DM) yield from surface vegetation clippings (4/12 soil cores) and soil organic carbon (SOC)

5 replicates for each habitat type; separate fields (n = 11), same field (n = 9)

16 of the sites → arable boundary 4 sites → boundary between arable and leys

Beetles, spiders

Abundance (log transformed)

Species richness (mean) and cumulative richness Also: Simpson’s diversity

February 2002

70m plot in each replicate

12 soil cores (12cm deep) every 5m along plot length

Invertebrates searched for in soil core samples for 10 minutes

Sparks et al. (1996) S England; Cambridgeshire; former arable, now hay silageRandomised with unequal replicationUncut (n = 3), laid professionally (n = 4) or coppiced (n = 5)Unequal replications of treatments for each plotButterflies (B), birds (BI), pitfall trap inverts (I) and plants (P)

Mean abundance

Mean species richness and Simpson’s index

One hawthorn hedge divided into 12 experimental plots, each ~20m

Random allocation of treatment to plots

B → Surveys on both hedge sides using Butterfly Monitoring Scheme methods. 19 visits (April – September 1995) and recordings taken to 5m from centre of hedge. Simpson’s diversity measure used.

BI → Monthly visits between March – August, bird positions mapped, and hedges searched for nests

I → 3 pitfall traps set per plot (central hedge and 5m each side of midpoint) over 8 weeks ending mid-October, samples per plot pooled

P → July 1995 survey of hedge- bottom and woody species using 5 2m 2 quadrats along middle 10m of hedgerow. Quadrats averaged to get ground cover estimate. Some plots recorded canopy species.

Staley et al. (2016) 

S England; Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Devon

Not stated in paper but further research suggests predominantly arable sites

Full factorial hedgerow treatment across 5 sites

Cutting frequency: annual, biennial, triennial Timing: early autumn, late winter Intensity: standard, incremental

Also measured: Hedgerow woody vegetation height

1 control plot in each block with no managementLepidoptera (larvae and pupae – labelled as ‘vulnerable’ or ‘robust’ for susceptibility to treatment)

Abundance (scaled by height), translated into cumulative abundance (2011-2013)

Species richness for ‘vulnerable’ and ‘robust’ Lepidoptera depending on life stage and location in September (corresponding to autumn-cut)

Also: Shannon- Wiener diversity index

5 farm sites with 3 randomised block experiments each – each block divided into 20m contiguous hedgerow plots

Ful factorial assignment of hedgerow management treatments in each block

Total replications of factorial combinations affected by Waddeston site with blackthorn hedge as some length wasn’t suitable: n = 15 for autumn cut, n = 12 for winter cut (3 blocks missing due to Waddeston)

Larvae and pupae collected in May 2011-2013; guttering inserted into hedge 80cm above ground and beaten 5 times, repeated at 5m, 10m and 15m along plot

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal