Replicating the wild diet inĬaptivity will likely be precluded by the limited number of invertebrate species that can be reared on Order to make evidence based husbandry recommendations.Ĭaptive diets for both larval and post metamorphic amphibians are likely to differ from dietsĬonsumed by larval and post metamorphic amphibians in the field. Possible to recommend water parameters and UV provision based on captive husbandry experienceĪnd a more evidence based approach utilising parameters from the field should be developed in Water parameters and UVB exposure in the field require documentation. The information in this Best Practice Guideline has come from a variety of sources including anĮxtensive literature review, the experience of the authors and others in the captive husbandry ofĪlytes species as well as direct observations of the species in the field.Īmphibian husbandry is a rapidly evolving field and there are many aspects that require further Nevertheless, comparative effectiveness studies can provide valuable guidance for evidence-based conservation. However, small sample size and a lack of randomization may a priori represent an impediment to strong inference. We conclude that comparative effectiveness studies can be used to provide critical information for improved conservation action. This case study shows that successful amphibian conservation action depends on landscape complementation, i.e., the paired availability of suitable aquatic and terrestrial micro-habitat. Although characteristics of the created ponds mattered, the availability of suitable terrestrial microhabitat (such as dry stone walls) was even more important in terms of conservation success as measured by colonization and abundance. We measured habitat variables at three spatial scales (pond, terrestrial microhabitat, and landscape) and used multistate occupancy and N-mixture models to account for imperfect detection and to relate the explanatory variables to pond colonization, species abundance and the presence of tadpoles (i.e., evidence for successful reproduction). We used the comparative effectiveness approach to evaluate the outcome of a pond creation project. We use an amphibian conservation study to discuss the benefits and limits of this approach. In doing so, one can determine which are the most beneficial interventions despite the lack of a control and a formal experimental design. Comparative effectiveness studies, on the other hand, compare multiple conservation interventions among each other. This is often done by comparing an intervention to a control. Assessing the outcome of a conservation intervention is thus key to improving its efficiency. Conservation action aims at halting the erosion of biodiversity.

Vocalia societe generale