Axinotarsus pulicarius
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Soldier 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: | Axinotarsus pulicarius |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Fabricius, 1777) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Alexander, 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Vulnerable. At the time of the most recent red-list (2014) it had been found in five hectads in the period since 1980, concentrated in the Thames Gateway area; the southern coastal sites all appear to have been lost. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Site protection and general conservation management have not proved to be adequate. |
| 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 question as posed is so broadly worded as to be difficult to answer for species with limited ecological knowledge. The larvae are unknown so it is uncertain whether general management prescriptions to increase structural diversity (e.g. grazing) might be beneficial or harmful. Increasing the availability of a particular successional stage might be favourable if this was known, but at this stage it isn't. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Unknown |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | The larvae are unknown but are believed to develop in the stems or at the roots of plants in areas of damp grassland and coastal shingle. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Research to characterise the ecology of the beetle, in terms of vegetation structure, openness, and hydrology
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Site selection should be based on data from the Soldier Beetle Recording Scheme
Comments: Insufficient data are available to fully characterise the ecology of the beetle, in terms of vegetation structure
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Resurvey historic sites without recent records, particularly on the south coast
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Unknown
Comments: Site selection will have to be based on a desk-study if data are not available from a recording scheme
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Ensure appropriate habitat management is implemented at all occupied sites. This should be based on the results of Actions 1 and 2, and may include sparing areas from annual management, and creation/restoration and management of flower-rich rich grassland.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Unknown
Comments: Site prioritisation will be based on the results of Actions 1 and 2
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.