Bird's-nest (Monotropa hypopitys subsp. hypophegea)
Key Details
Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
Red List Status: | Least Concern (Not Relevant) [LC(nr)] |
D5 Status: | |
Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
Taxa Included Synonym: | Hypopitys monotropa subsp. hypophegea |
UKSI Recommended Name: | Hypopitys monotropa subsp. hypophegea |
UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Wallr.) Tzvelev |
UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
Red List Citation: | in Stroh et al., 2014 |
Notes on taxonomy/listing: | Listed in s41 at sp and subsp rank; in D5 at species level only. Refer to Hypopitys monotropa (D5 name). |
Criteria
Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
Response: | No |
Justification: | There are insufficient data to assess trends at subspecies level and so it is assessed the same as the species as EN due to a dramatic decline in its extent of occurrence since the 1950s (Stroh et al., 2014). Refer to Hypopitys monotropa in datasheet. |
Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
Response: | No |
Justification: | There are insufficient data to assess trends at subspecies level and so it is assessed the same as the species as EN due to a dramatic decline in its extent of occurrence since the 1950s (Stroh et al., 2014). Refer to Hypopitys monotropa in datasheet. |
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: | N/A |
Justification: |
Species Assessment
Not relevant as no Key Actions defined.
Key Actions
No Key Actions Defined
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.