Sandwich Click Beetle (Melanotus punctolineatus)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Click beetle |
| Red List Status: | (Not Relevant) [(not listed)(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Melanotus punctolineatus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Pelerin, 1829) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | (not listed) |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Extremely localised and therefore vulnerable to extinction |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | There are insufficient data to assess trends at subspecies level and so it is assessed the same as the species as EN due to a dramatic decline in its extent of occurrence since the 1950s (Stroh et al., 2014). See line in data for Hypopitys monotropa. |
| 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: | Species would benefit from an increase in dune habitats and dry, grassland habitats in southern locations. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Life history factor/s |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Easily confused with two much more common species. This species is probably on the northern edge of its range as habitat requirements much less constrained in more southern parts of its range |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of known and similar sites
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Sites along the south coast of England and Wales similar to known localities
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Define autecology of larvae and adults at known sites
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Deal/Sandwich Coast, Kent
Comments: Important questions to try and answer with targeted research include: What do the larvae need? What the dispersal abilities of the adults? How will existing populations be impacted by climate change.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Translocations of individuals to sites with similar characteristics
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: N/A
Comments: Combine with survey of sites to define habitat characteristics and possible previously unknown populations
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.