Broad-leaved Cudweed (Filago pyramidata)
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: | Filago pyramidata |
| 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 no apparent reverse in the decline in Area of Occupancy which is the reason for the species current Red List status. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | It's dependence on nutrient-poor, thin, disturbed soils makes it unlikely to recover solely on farmland (e.g. cultivated arable margins), particularly as most existing sites are not on agricultural land. The small and localised nature of existing populations, and the species' apparent dispersal by exozoochory, may also make colonisation of new sites unlikely without deliberate human intervention. |
| 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: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Maintain or establish appropriate management at all known sites so that population size is stable or increasing in medium-long term.
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: Ranscombe Farm, Halnaker Chalk Pit, Clandon Chalk Pit, Sonning Chalk Pit, High Down Pit, Banstead Downs, Salisbury Plain, Thurrock.
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 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: Selection of reintroduction sites should include consideration of potential for ectozoochorous spread (including spread by humans/vehicles).
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.