Marsh Fleawort (Tephroseris palustris)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| Red List Status: | Extinct (globally) (Not Relevant) [EX(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: | Tephroseris palustris |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) Fourr. |
| 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: | Tephroseris palustris is a biennial or short-lived perennial herb of muddy margins of ponds and ditches that formerly occurred in East Anglia and the Cambridgeshire Fens but was lost to drainage and agricultural changes by the end of the 19th century with a last reported occurrence in 1899. A small scale reintroduction trial was undertaken at a number of sites in Norfolk in 2023 using plants grown from seed collected from The Netherlands. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Reinstatement of this species as a British native will require the introduction of the plant to further suitable sites within its historic range. |
| 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 is currently too rare to benefit from untargeted habitat management. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - sufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake a review of sites within its historic range in order to identify sites in suitable condition for future reintroductions.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Undertake a review of the ecology of the species in Europe to gain a better understanding of its precise habitat requirements and reasons for its decline.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Undertake further reintroduction trials at sites that seem suitable based on the results of the autecological review.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 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.