Thinobius brevipennis
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: | Thinobius brevipennis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Kiesenwetter, 1850 |
| 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: | A rare species with only three known post-1979 localities in England: Charmouth and Eype Mouth, Dorset (vc9); Totland Bay, Isle of Wight (vc10), Highcliffe, South Hampshire (vc11) and Newborough Warren. Pre 1980 it was known from more sites, including several in East Anglia (e.g. Wicken Fen). Recent sites for T. brevipennis at Eype Mouth and Totland Bay are from damp sand and clay close to seepages on sparsely vegetated soft coastal cliffs. Earlier records are mostly from the East Anglian Fens such as Wicken, where it occurred on patches of sparsely vegetated damp mud. Known from damp dune slacks in Wales. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Known from only two modern English sites and dependent on quite specific habitat conditions. Targeted survey and actions are necessary to conserve this species. |
| 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: | Apparently very restricted distribution and potentially very specific habitat requirements make it unlikely that untargeted management will benefit this species. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Combination or other (detail in comments) |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Climate change will make soft rock coastal cliffs increasingly vulnerable as a habitat. The species also seems to be natural rarity and has only ever been known from a small area of coastline. Actions to increase area and resilience of suitable habitat may be at odds with other coastal management – e.g. sea defences to reduce erosion, although there may also be opportunities for these to work in the same direction. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of soft-rock cliffs on the south coast and Isle of Wight, including its known site, to search for additional populations of this species, elucidate autecology and more tightly characterise habitat requirements.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Charmouth and Eype Mouth, Dorset (vc9); Totland Bay, Isle of Wight (vc10), Highcliffe, South Hampshire (vc11)
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Survey at Wicken Fen and other East Anglian Fen sites to determine current status of East Anglian populations.
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Wicken Fen NNR.
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Provide species advice/support for coastal defence strategies to protect soft-rock cliffs from excessive erosion and disturbance.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites: Charmouth and Eype Mouth, Dorset (vc9); Totland Bay, Isle of Wight (vc10), Highcliffe, South Hampshire (vc11)
Comments: Reducing habitat loss resulting from sea level rise and increased storminess requires landscape scale strategic action such as beach recharge or modifications to hard coastal defences (working with EA and LPA). Shoreline Management Plans and other reviews will help identify locations where no action is necessary or, alternatively, where management measures are required to maintain suitable conditions for soft rock cliffs. Some erosion is required to maintain early successional conditions and bare substrate required by Bledius filipes so coastal defences that reduce erosion too much are likely to be detrimental.
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.