Deliphrum tectum
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Rove beetle (macrostaph) |
| 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: | Deliphrum tectum |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Paykull, 1789) |
| 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: | Yes |
| Justification: | Significantly declined and associated with patch habitats, particularly herbivore dung in upland areas of north and west Britain. Likely seriously impacted by use of veterinary chemicals. Now restricted to a few upland sites in England, likely climatically limited. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | This species is associated with a wide range of patch habitats, particularly herbivore dung but also including carrion, fungi, sap runs and moss. Occurs in a range of open and wooded habitats, particularly moorland, and so is not apparently dependent on a particular habitat or management regime. |
| 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 is associated with a wide range of patch habitats iand occurs in a range of open and wooded habitats and so is not apparently dependent on a particular habitat or management regime. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Climate change |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | One of a suite of patch habitat associated rove beetles that have experienced significant declines in recent decades. The species is not apparently dependent on any particular habitat, region or management as long as suitable patch resources are provided. The most significant factor in these declines is likely to be the widespread use of veterinary chemicals such as Avermectins to treat livestock, making dung toxic to dependent invertebrates. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Work with landowners/managers to minimise use of veterinary chemicals that pass out in animal dung on known sites and surroundings.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Pressure mitigation
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Combes Valley, Staffordshire (vc39); Alport Dale, Glossop area and Longshaw, Derbyshire (vc57); Huddersfield area, Little Don Valley, North Dean Wood and the Rotherham area, all in South-west Yorkshire (vc63); Barney Beck, North-west Yorkshire (vc65); Bays Leap, South Northumberland (vc67)
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Carry out autecological research to better understand the conservation requirements of this species.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Combes Valley, Staffordshire (vc39); Alport Dale, Glossop area and Longshaw, Derbyshire (vc57); Huddersfield area, Little Don Valley, North Dean Wood and the Rotherham area, all in South-west Yorkshire (vc63); Barney Beck, North-west Yorkshire (vc65); Bays Leap, South Northumberland (vc67)
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.