Ophonus subsinuatus
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Ground beetle |
| Red List Status: | Critically Endangered/Possibly Extinct (Not Relevant) [CR(PE)(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: | Ophonus subsinuatus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Rey, 1886 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Telfer, 2016 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Only one record, in England, dated 1886 which was overlooked until 2001. The species is very rare if not extinct in Britain although very little survey effort has been targeted at its only known site since it was recognised as a British species. As with other Ophonus species it is neglected and potentially under-recorded. The possibility remains that this species could be rediscovered in Britain. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Extremely localised (one known site) and thus vulnerable to extinction, if not already extinct. A targeted survey is urgently required to establish this species' continued existence, with site-specific habitat management and site protection required. |
| 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: | No |
| Justification: | This species would not benefit from untargeted management |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Relict or natural rarity |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | In locations with a warm sunny microclimate. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake a targeted survey of potentially suitable locations in the Portland area to provide an updated status review.
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Portland, Dorset
Comments: In the perhaps unlikely event that populations are found then undertake autecological studies and implement follow up management if needed.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Carry out autecological research to help identify the nature and quality of suitable habitats, particularly the nature and openness of suitable substrates and their management requirements, as well as the pressures which might result in further declines including eutrophication resulting in dense vegetation growth.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Portland, Dorset
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Depending on the results of the autecological study and site management reviews restore suitable substrates and vegetation structure. This might require changes to or the introduction of livestock grazing and/or mechanical scarification to restore bare substrates and open conditions.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Portland, Dorset
Comments:
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.