|
Scientific Name | Pachypodium bispinosum (L.f.) A.DC. |
Higher Classification | Dicotyledons |
Family | APOCYNACEAE |
Common Names | Bobbejaankos (a), Kafferkambroo (a), Kragman (a), Sterkman (a) |
National Status |
Status and Criteria | Endangered A3cd+4acd |
Assessment Date | 2022/10/14 |
Assessor(s) | N.N. Mhlongo, T. Variawa & D. Raimondo |
Justification | This species is severely impacted by illegal collection for the specialist succulent trade and thousands of wild collected plants have been exported from South Africa. The population has experienced a decline of between 30-40% in the past two generations (100 years) due to illegal collection, habitat loss and degradation. Future climate models predict severe impacts to the species and this combined with illegal harvesting will result in further 50-60% declines over the next 50 years. It therefore qualifies as Endangered under criterion A. |
Distribution |
Endemism | South African endemic |
Provincial distribution | Eastern Cape |
Range | This species is endemic to the Western and Eastern Cape provinces, where it occurs from Ladismith to Somerset East, Willowmore districts to east of Steytlerville, Port Elizabeth and Ecca River Valley. |
Habitat and Ecology |
Major system | Terrestrial |
Major habitats | Agter-Sederberg Shrubland, Albany Valley Thicket |
Description | It occurs in dry, rocky areas in Albany thicket and Rainshadow Valley Karoo. |
Threats |
| This species has been heavily impacted by wild harvesting to supply horticultural markets. Collectors dig up entire plants and wipe out whole populations in one collection event (Scientific Authority of South Africa, Pachypodium report 2018/2019). More than 70 000 live plants of this species have been exported from South Africa since 1980, with at least 11 600 of the plants exported from 1995 being of wild origin. The nursery which was the sole exporter of this species was recently exposed to be involved in wild plant collecting for several species. It is therefore assumed that the majority, if not all exports from this nursery were likely to have been wild collected (Scientific Authority of South Africa, Pachypodium report 2018/2019). This large offtake is expected to have resulted in a significant loss to the overall population. Subpopulations occurring on privately owned farms are seldomly poached and may only be impacted by low levels of herbivory by porcupines. Large-scale harvesting is evident in subpopulations closer to residential areas like De Rust (Jan Vlok pers. comm, 2022). Anthropogenic climate change is a long-term threat to this species. Climate models for future emission scenarios (RCP 8.5) predict that over 60-70% of its habitat will be lost by the time frame 2061-2080 (Guo et al. 2019). Climate models also include new suitable habitat becoming available, however both this species' ability to disperse to new suitable habitat and its resilience to the impact of climate change are unknown. We therefore conservatively estimate that between 50 and 60% of the population may be impacted as a result of climate change. As the species occurs mostly on rocky slopes in mountainous arid areas, it is not expected to suffer much from land transformation (Scientific Authority of South Africa, Pachypodium report 2018/2019). However, several sites are close to roads and could be impacted by future developments. Grazing and trampling pressure, urban development in the Coega area, drought and erosion and road constructions may increase pressure on wild populations of this species (Scientific Authority of South Africa, Pachypodium report 2018/2019). There has been a past population decline of less than 5% in the Humansdorp area along the Kabeljouws River and along the Fish River (Committee Flats) due to agricultural activities. |
Population |
Based on information obtained from resource surveys conducted by the South African National Biodiversity Institute in 2010/2011, the population size for this species is estimated to be more than 16 000 plants. This number includes 2400 large individuals and about 1775 seedlings. However, an expert from the Karoo suspects this might be an underestimate and the actual figure is likely to be 20-30 times more (J. Vlok 2022 pers. comm.). The population in 1980 is therefore suspected to have been between 320 000 - 480 000 mature individuals. Recruitment appeared to be infrequent, and seedlings were mostly found to be associated with nurse plants (Scientific Authority of South Africa, Pachypodium report 2018/2019). Many subpopulations lacked large, older individuals which is concerning as this species is long-lived and is therefore characterized by adult persistence rather than high recruitment. The species has been recorded in more than 30 locations. However, plants could only be found at 18 of the 30 sites assessed during the resource surveys. This suggests the possible loss of 40% of the population. Harvesting of wild plants was believed to be negligible in the past but several sites assessed showed clear signs of removal, particularly in the Uitenhage and Port Elizabeth areas. This harvesting is believed to have led to the local extinction of subpopulations in the Port Elizabeth area. Based on 70 000 live individuals being exported from South Africa since 1980 (majority suspected to be of wild origin), a minimum of 14-21% of the population has declined due to harvesting. This species’ distribution falls within several state protected areas in the Eastern Cape and some subpopulations are protected on privately owned farms (Scientific Authority of South Africa, Pachypodium report 2018/2019). The combined impacts of these threats have led to an overall decline of at least 30-40% in the past 100 years (two generations). Future climate change and ongoing pressure due to illegal collection is likely to lead to a further 50-60% decline by 2061-2080 (one generation).
|
Population trend | Decreasing |
Assessment History |
Taxon assessed |
Status and Criteria |
Citation/Red List version | | Pachypodium bispinosum (L.f.) A.DC. | Least Concern | Raimondo et al. (2009) | |
Bibliography |
Goldblatt, P. and Manning, J.C. 2000. Cape Plants: A conspectus of the Cape Flora of South Africa. Strelitzia 9. National Botanical Institute, Cape Town.
Guo, D., Powrie, L.W. and Boyd, D.W. 2019. Climate change and biodiversity threats on Pachypodium species in South Africa. Journal of geoscience and environmental protection 7 37-44.
Raimondo, D., von Staden, L., Foden, W., Victor, J.E., Helme, N.A., Turner, R.C., Kamundi, D.A. and Manyama, P.A. 2009. Red List of South African Plants. Strelitzia 25. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
Vlok, J. and Schutte-Vlok, A.L. 2010. Plants of the Klein Karoo. Umdaus Press, Hatfield.
|
Citation |
| Mhlongo, N.N., Variawa, T. & Raimondo, D. 2022. Pachypodium bispinosum (L.f.) A.DC. National Assessment: Red List of South African Plants version . Accessed on 2025/04/23 |
Comment on this assessment
