Oxtongue Broomrape (Orobanche picridis)
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: | Orobanche picridis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | F.W.Schultz |
| 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: | Populations are small, localised and vulnerable to habitat change. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | As an annual with localised populations, this species will require species-focussed habitat management to maintain populations. |
| 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): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Kent population has been subject to detailed annual counts. Unclear whether the IoW population receives the same attention. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Suitable habitat includes exposed cliff-edges, cliff ledges, and slumped material at cliff bases. In areas where the plant currently occurs in Kent and on the Isle of Wight, ensure such areas are kept clear of scrub to maintain open vegetation with a substantial proportion of bare soil. Scrub clearance might best be carried out on a short rotation of up to five years in order to prevent establishment of a tight grassy sward.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Dover to Kingsdown, Kent; Freshwater Bay, Isle of Wight.
Comments: Action needs to be ongoing.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Improve chalk cliff habitat for this species through remediation of cliff-falls, public safety measures, or works to improve or change access.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Pressure mitigation
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Chalk cliffs on IoW that are or may in future be suitable for the species; chalk cliffs in East Kent where the species occurs or has occurred in the past.
Comments: Action needs to be continuous.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Continue detailed annual population counts at known locations, with each location broken down into sub-sites (e.g. as with Dover-Kingsdown, which is broken down into 18 sections for the purpose of counting) so that (a) the dynamics of populations can be to some extent understood, and (b) that localised management recommendations can be made as necessary.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Dover to Kingsdown, Kent; Freshwater Bay, Isle of Wight.
Comments: Needs 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.