Micaria albovittata
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > spider (Araneae) > Spider |
| 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: | Micaria albovittata |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Lucas, 1846) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Harvey et al., 2017 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | VU, criteria: B2ab(ii,iv): 3 new sites since last review may improve threat status. Confined to the S coast of England. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Absent from many apparently suitable locations |
| 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: | Yes |
| Justification: | Some evidence of it colonising restored habitat not immediately adjacent to known populations |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | South coast grassland specialist, found on sandier cf granite cliffs on SW peninsula, and in short calcareous grassland within a few miles of the sea further E. Evidence of local recolonisation of restored grassland suggests potential for recovery sufficient to remove threat status. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted re-survey of all former and nearby sites, using standardised methodology to assess current status (and establish baseline for national monitoring programme)
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Survey to cover all south coast cliff grassland.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Autecological study to characterise microhabitat requirements, elucidate relationship with ants, and inform coastal grassland management.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: e.g. Hastings Country Park, East Sussex; Prawle Point, Devon
Comments: Focus on reliable but contrasting sites
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Site management to include of scrub control with aftermath grazing to maintain short, open turf
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Action likely to be integral to wider management objectives for site
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.