Anotylus saulcyi
Key Details
Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Rove beetle (macrostaph) |
Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Not Relevant) [NT(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: | Anotylus saulcyi |
UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Pandellé, 1867) |
UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
Red List Citation: | Boyce, 2022 |
Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
Response: | No |
Justification: | This species is rarely recorded but is primarily associated with subterranean mammal nests , particularly those of moles, and therefore likely to be seriously under-recorded. There is an apparent serious recent decline in records (100%) but this seems likely to be due to recorded bias rather than a real decline. Whilst it qualifies for NS and NT status based on known records these statuses have been assigned cautionarily and there are no known threats or provable decline of the species. It is also unclear how conservation actions would benefit this species. |
Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
Response: | No |
Justification: | There are no obvious species-specific actions that would benefit this species. Its status is also almost certainly an overestimate of rarity. |
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: | N/A |
Justification: |
Species Assessment
Not relevant as no Key Actions defined.
Key Actions
No Key Actions Defined
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.