Ciliate Strap-Lichen (Heterodermia leucomela)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Fungus or lichen > lichen > Lichen |
| Red List Status: | Endangered (Not Relevant) [EN(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: | Heterodermia leucomelos |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) Poelt |
| 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: | Endangered. Known from fewer sites now than pre-1960. Very few records in England in the past 20 years. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Evidence gaps limit understanding. Little recent information on current status, trends, threats etc. |
| 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: | Likely to benefit from coastal grazing creating and maintaining short turf/soil niches. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Produce an updated species dossier to collate information on current and historic sites, including results of surveys and assessment of threats and remedial actions.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: all
Comments: Fundamental first step ahead of monitoring/condition assessments. There is very little information available and seemingly very little known on current status and condition of most sites. Seems to be no summary/collation since B. Edwards' work in early 2000s (see references), which can form the basis of this work. This will also form the basis for a monitoring/condition assessment plan.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Monitor all known sites not specifically monitored since 2020, to understand current status, threats and actions to address threats. This will form the basis of any national monitoring plan.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: all
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Once status and threats understood, determine the key actions required at site-scale and provide advice to site managers, including at designated sites.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: all
Comments: Also formulate a plan for any national level threats that need to be addressed. Need to address recognition and management of the species within designated sites.
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.