Pomatinus substriatus
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Water beetle |
| 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: | Pomatinus substriatus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Müller, P.W.J., 1806) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Foster, 2010 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Records suggest a marked decline in this riverine beetle, which is often associated with submerged tree roots and must be vulnerable to river engineering. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Evidence gaps exist concerning its autecological needs. Targeted monitoring is also required. Raise awareness of the importance of submerged roots and timber. |
| 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: | River species |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Unknown |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Like Stenelmis caniculata, this is a species which requires better monitoring. P. substriatus is unlikely to be detected by standard sampling methods based on kick-sampling riffles. Ad hoc recording as part of GB water beetle recording scheme (Balfour-Browne Club/Aquatic Coleoptera Conservation Trust). However, recording of riverine species tends to be more spasmodic than for still-water species. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Review options for monitoring this species as part of an England threatened riverine invertebrate assemblage. A broad framework is likely to be more efficient than a multitude of single-species monitoring actions. Any such framework should consider EA biological monitoring coverage, and taxa unlikely to be detected by standard kick-sampling methods.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Undertake a literature review of the species' ecological requirements to inform river managers and river restoration practitioners. Consider a multi-species project involving other threatened riverine water beetles (perhaps encompassing other river taxa?). This review should enable its audience to understand when standard measures might need to be re-considered and should include a series of species factsheets with distribution maps.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Raise awareness of the importance of submerged roots and timber where the species lives. Consider a multi-species approach, encompassing other threatened water beetles and freshwater inverts.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Education/awareness raising
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
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.