Ten-spotted Pot Beetle (Cryptocephalus decemmaculatus)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Leaf beetle or ally |
| 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: | Cryptocephalus decemmaculatus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Linnaeus, 1758) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Hubble, 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Only known from one location in England, with a small number of populations in Scotland |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Piper and others have worked on this species, but more data is needed, especially on introductions via captive-reared adults. |
| 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: | This is not a specialist species of Schwingmoors, contrary to what the English distribution shows. Scottish and continental populations are to be a found in a much greater variety of scrub habitats. In England, the species has become constrained by agricultural intensification and poor dispersal ability. Creating sheltered scrub on moist substrates would benefit this species if given an initial helping hang via introductions. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Species now one of the most well understood in the genus in terms of its conservation biology. However, many autecology questions still to answer. Has been successfully reared in captivity |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of sites with potentially suitable habitat
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 with potentially suitable habitat
Comments: Focus on those areas with potentially suitable habitat that are within the bounds of the known historical range. Perhaps make use of AI algorithms to define areas of potential occupation. Likely to be several populations to be discovered in Scotland.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Translocations of adult beetles to sites with suitable habitat
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Meres and Mosses of NW England. Sites in Scotland
Comments: Tie in with surveys to confirm absence of species from donor sites
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Compare population genetics and autecology of English and Scottish populations
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Wybunbury Moss and Loch Rannoch Area
Comments: Results will inform strategies for translocations
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.