Olibrus norvegicus
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Pill 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: | Olibrus norvegicus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Munster, 1901 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Lane, 2021 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Vulnerable. Discovered at Sandwich Bay in 2012 and recorded there again in 2017. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Based on present knowledge extremely localised and therefore vulnerable to habitat degradation |
| 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): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Relict or natural rarity |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Adults consume the pollen of yellow Asteraceae, possibly hawk’s-beards Crepis sp. and the larvae feed in the seedhead and receptacle of the flower. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Autecological research to better characterise habitat requirements and inform management, using standardised methodology to establish baseline for national monitoring programme
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Sandwich Bay
Comments: Vegetation and microhabitat preferences should be quantified
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Ensure appropriate habitat management is implemented at all occupied sites. This should be based on the results of Actions 1, and is likely to include removal of sea buckthorn.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Sandwich Bay
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of sand dune sites in Kent, Essex, and Sussex
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Greatstone Dunes, Colne Point, Camber Sands
Comments: The beetle may be a recent colonisation, or an overlooked long-term resident. In either case it might be present and other sand-dune sites in south-east England. At Sandwich Bay it occurs in small numbers and the best way of finding it elsewhere is likely to be targeted survey.
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.