Anthicus tristis
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Darkling beetle or ally |
| 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: | Anthicus tristis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Schmidt, W.L.E., 1842 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Alexander et al., 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Only a small number of recent records and appears to have declined. However, this is a small, easily overlooked species and under-recording is an important factor. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Info from seabird census needed. Long term non significant increase Eng BBS (25 yr +23%, 10 yr +7%). Eng WeBS trends (25 yr +74%, 10 yr +33%). Seabirds Count = a 6% increase in English population; coastal -13%, inland +30% Revised upon review that population is stable so conservation is not required at this stage. |
| 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: | Seems to rely on organic matter on coastal shingle, sandy expanses and saltmarsh. Development, coastal erosion and beach cleaning may all negatively impact this species. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Unknown |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Only a small number of recent records, but this is a small, easily overlooked species. Very little known of the ecology of the adults and larvae. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
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: Chesil Beach
Comments: What are micro-habitat preferences and diet of the adults and larvae? What are the dispersal abilities of the adults? Reliable identification of larvae may only be possible using molecular tools.
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.