Yellow Centaury (Cicendia filiformis)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| 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: | Cicendia filiformis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) Delarbre |
| 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: | Healthy populations survive at the Lizard & the New Forest, but still declining across much of range & often restricted to small, highly localised colonies |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Highly reliant on continuing sufficient grazing & disturbance (both from livestock & human activity). Disappears rapidly if heavy levels of management cease |
| 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: | Reintroduction or maintenance of grazing across extant or former sites or habitat complexes likely to benefit some populations, but targeted management needed to restore species widely |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 5. Remedial action identified |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Species likely to respond favourably to suitable management: a long-lived seed bank allows the recovery of 'lost' populations |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Monitor a sample of populations in stronghold areas, and all populations in non-stronghold/vulnerable areas. Review future management options in light of findings.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Effective monitoring will allow rapid amendment / introduction of appropriate management
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Manage all populations through maintenance of/reintroduction of appropriate grazing regimes, aiming to expand site & establish linkages between scattered populations
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Include species at edge of range, if sustainable long-term management of sites can be reinstated/maintained
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Introduce a diversity of microhabitats into favoured heathland locations, through creation / restoration of pools, hollows, trackways etc - including 'ghost' pools & trackways.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat creation
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
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.