Philorhizus sigma
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Ground beetle |
| 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: | Philorhizus sigma |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Rossi, 1790) |
| 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 recorded in England where it is very local in the north and southeast. Recorded from fourteen locations in the post-1980 period (half of these in one wider location), this species underwent a substantial range decline during the 20th century. With no records in at least the last 14 years at all but one location, it seems likely that the decline is continuing. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | A very localised species with a significant historical decline and evidence of an ongoing decline. A targeted survey is needed to identify remaining occupied locations, followed by management and site protection measures. |
| 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: | Wider scale improvements to wetland habitat management and creation of new wetlands suitable for this species might be beneficial but only if of sufficiently wide scale and extent. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Extinction debt |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | In litter in fens and marshes near standing freshwater. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Review historical and current management at existing locations, particularly at its most important and well-established location at Amberely Wild Brooks, and undertake literature reviews to characterise the range of micro-habitats within which it is found, especially the hydrology, vegetation and litter availability of wetland habitats. The reviews should help identify the management requirements of optimal habitats, as well as the pressures which might result in further declines such as reduced water availability resulting from climatic changes.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: The most important and perhaps only remaining location is Amberley Wildbrooks, West Sussex. Other more recently occupied sites (last 20 years) are the River Idle, near Misson in Notts and Whiddon Deer Park, Devon.
Comments: Related to action 2.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Depending on the results of the autecological study and site management reviews maintain or restore suitable wetland conditions by improved water management (raising or lowering water levels to maintain wet/damp soils through the year), appropriate grazing regimes to maintain ideal vegetation structure and good availability of vegetation litter in proximity to open fresh water.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Amberley Wildbrooks, West Sussex, River Idle, near Misson in Notts and Whiddon Deer Park, Devon.
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Assess need and potential for re-introduction following suitable management at historical sites (last recorded occurrence in the 1980s) such as Elland gravel pits in West Yorkshire and Inkle and Thorne Moors in South Yorkshire. Amberley Wildbrooks reserve is likely to provide the most robust donor population. Consider ecological requirements of the species, suitability of site (e.g. subject to ongoing threats and/or climate change effects), timing of release and the need for ongoing habitat management. No information could be found on the feasibility of re-introducing this species nor the techniques necessary for success.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Amberley Wildbrooks as a potential donor site for re-introductions to Elland GP/River Calder in W Yorks and Thorne Moors area in S Yorks.
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.