Graphina pauciloculata
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Fungus or lichen > lichen > Lichen |
| Red List Status: | Vulnerable (Not Relevant) [VU(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | Included in the baseline Red List Index for England (Wilkins, Wilson & Brown, 2022) |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Allographa pauciloculata |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Coppins & P. James) Aptroot & Weerakoon |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Woods & Coppins, 2012 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | A rare species endemic to GB & Ireland. In England, mainly in the SW peninsula with an outlier in Cumbria. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | A specialist, dependent to a fair extent on large populations of its usual host (Allographa anomala) in old growth woodlands, but there are known threats to both species from increasing shade in woodland due to e.g. expansion of holly. |
| Question 3: | At a landscape scale, would the species benefit from untargeted habitat management to increase habitat mosaics, structural diversity, or particular successional stages? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Should respond well to bringing extensive oceanic woodlands into good condition, especially restoring sustainable grazing and maintaining a gladed structure. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Healthy populations require extensively grazed minimum intervention pasture woodland, restoring grazing to woodlands is difficult and opposed by some policies. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Produce a species dossier to collate information on current and historic sites, including results of surveys and assessment of threats and remedial actions needed at each site.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Positive impacts on many threatened lichen species. Potential to bundle this with other grazing dependant woodland species.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Survey sites with no recent information (identified through A1) to update status assessments, identify habitat management issues impacting the species and actions required to address them.
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Positive impacts on many threatened lichen species. Potential to bundle this with other grazing dependant woodland species.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Advise and support site owners and managers to implement the site-level actions identified in A1.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Positive impacts on many threatened lichen species. Potential to bundle this with other grazing dependant woodland species.
Acknowledgment:
Data used on this website are adapted from Threatened species recovery actions 2025 baseline (JP065): Technical report and spreadsheet user guide (Natural England, 2025). Available here.