Pheasant's-eye (Adonis annua)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| Red List Status: | Endangered (Not Relevant) [EN(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Adonis annua |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | L. |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | in Stroh et al., 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Atlas data shows ongoing strong decline, following strong long-term declines in Area of Occupancy and Extent of Occurrence. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | The conditions necessary for ripening of seed, involving exposure to summer sunshine on bare soils, means that general habitat management such as cultivated arable margins, is unlikely to be sufficient for recovery. Additionally, the large size of the seeds and likely poor dispersal, means that deliberate introductions are likely to be necessary. |
| 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 would not benefit from untargeted management |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Maintain or establish appropriate management at known sites so that population size is stable or increasing in medium-long term. Ideal management on arable land involves cutting immediately after seed dispersal in July followed by a short fallow period and cultivation in August or early September. This will enable after-ripening on the soil surface and promote autumn germination. Reference should be made to guidance developed under the Back from the Brink project.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Duration and scale of implementation are all very rough estimates. This species often appears as short-lived populations, and it will be necessary to identify those sites where it consistent appears in numbers, in order that they can be the focus of this action. Refer to Back from the Brink Ecology & Conservation Portfolio for the species. Regular, structured monitoring will be necessary. There will be value in establishing best practice for control of pernicious weeds (e.g. grass weeds) on arable sites.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Establish a programme of reintroductions onto suitable sites across the species' former range.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Refer to Back from the Brink Ecology & Conservation Portfolio for the species. Regular, structured monitoring will be necessary. There will be value in establishing best practice for control of pernicious weeds (e.g. grass weeds) on arable sites.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Maintain a database of all known sites and the status of their populations, with annual updates.
Action targets: 8. Species recovering
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Action to be repeated annually.
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.