Pashford Pot Beetle (Cryptocephalus exiguus)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Leaf beetle or ally |
| 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: | Cryptocephalus exiguus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Schneider, D.H., 1792 |
| 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 the UK |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | More data needed on the autecology of this species as this is one of the scarce Pot Beetle species that could not be found reliably or in sufficient numbers to allow intensive study. Distribution data possibly confounded by similarity to C. labiatus. |
| 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 - Extinction debt |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Only one small population known, but very small and easily overlooked. Studying the autecology of this single, isolated population may possibly threaten it further |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Expand appropriately managed habitat at existing location, and elsewhere on reserve (for colonisation / translocation)
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat Creation
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Single existing site
Comments: Aims to improve the status of the single population we know we’ve got. Previous recommendations for in-situ habitat expansion at the last remaining site have so far not been carried out due to the presence of another threatened plant species. A way forward that balances this species’ needs with those around it will therefore have to be carefully planned to achieve a “win-win” outcome.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Establish viable and robust captive population and introduce to former / new locations
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Previous or new sites with matching habitat
Comments: As with some other Cryptocephalus species, breeds readily in captivity and gives hope to rearing adults for translocation / reinforcement. Consider multiple captive populations, from collection in different years, as insurance against failure and to increase genetic diversity. Document carefully all steps in establishing captive populations.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Improve understanding of species autecology based upon outcomes from prior actions
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites: Existing site and in captivity; potentially receptor sites.
Comments: This depends on finding a robust population that would tolerate intensive study to answer the autecological questions. A captive population would allow study of certain behaviours and traits.
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.