Greater Broomrape (Orobanche rapum-genistae)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Not Relevant) [NT(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 rapum-genistae |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Thuill. |
| 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: | Assessed as VU in England (Stroh et al. 2014) & whilst present in 83 hectads in Britain post 2000, there has been a 41% decline in area of occupancy, mainly from English sites. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | A species of managed gorse & broom habitats, & probably conservation management dependent |
| 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: | Effective gorse & broom management, incl. cutting likely to benefit species of such grass-scrub habitats |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | A large broomrape that responds well to gorse/broom management & disturbance, probably with long-lived seed bank |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake a full survey of all extant & recently lost sites (perhaps post 1987) to assess extent of colonies & current condition of sites
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: The scattered nature of colonies of this species, combined with its erratic appearances make this a difficult taxon to survey - but a full understanding of its current distribution is urgently required
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Undertake experimental field trials to understand ecology & to elucidate best management practice (including cutting of broom/gorse). Trials should seek to restore lost populations from dormant seed alongside extant sites. Management 'best practice' should be undertaken at key sites (extant and recent historic) to restore populations.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Research should be undertaken to fully understand the life cycle of O. rapum-genistae, including seed viability/longevity, role of disturbance for colony establishment etc
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Unknown
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.