Wild Asparagus (Asparagus prostratus)
Key Details
Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
Red List Status: | Endangered (Not Relevant) [EN(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: | Asparagus prostratus |
UKSI Recommended Authority: | Dumort. |
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: | EN in GB, VU in England. Total England population of this endemic species numbers c. 1300 plants |
Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
Response: | Yes |
Justification: | Some populations very small and/or of single sex or poor sex ratio. Ex situ bolstering of these populations has proven necessary. Additionally, natural regeneration appears very poor, & little understood. |
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): | 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented |
Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Life history factor/s |
National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
Species Comments: | A very long-lived, endemic perennial of cliff slope grasslands, clitter & flushes, & sand dunes. Survives in most English localities, though in some cases in very small numbers (exacerbated by dioecious nature of species). Ecology perhaps poorly known - particularly in relation to grazing history & recruitment from seed. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Monitor all populations on <5 year basis, recording number of plants, sex ratio, presence of seedlings, vegetation condition & structure, management etc. Review management / key actions in light of findings.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites: All.
Comments: Frequent monitoring will allow ongoing assessment of the state of populations (particularly vulnerable/small ones) & increase our understanding of the autecology of the species
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Investigate autecology of A. prostratus through a programme of research & management trials, to assess factors including impacts of different grazing animals (including historic grazing regimes), pollination, & seedling establishment
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Sites for A. prostratus were clearly grazed in the past, but presents a conundrum: how much does grazing damage this highly palatable species? Yet does grazing create bare/open microsites for seedling establishment?
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Maintain or enhance populations at all sites through traditional/appropriate management (e.g. grazing), including assessing need to bolster small populations / reintroduce lost populations through introduction of material raised ex situ. Action may include the potential notification of new SSSIs where no other mechanism for protection is available.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments: Management should target smaller sites (with < 10 plants) as a priority.
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.