|
Scientific Name | Encephalartos natalensis R.A.Dyer & I.Verd. |
Higher Classification | Gymnosperms |
Family | ZAMIACEAE |
Common Names | Broodboom (a), Cycad (e), Giant Cycad (e), Isidwaba-somkhovu (z), Isigqiki-semkhovu (z), Natal Cycad (e), Natal Giant Cycad (e), Natalbroodboom (a), Natal-broodboom (a), Umguza (x), Umhlungulo (z), Umphanga (x) |
National Status |
Status and Criteria | Vulnerable A2acd |
Assessment Date | 2020/05/21 |
Assessor(s) | J.D. Bösenberg |
Justification | This species is assessed as Vulnerable. Although widespread, this species has declined in certain parts of its range. The overall population decline is estimated to be >30% over the past 60 years based on repeat photographs and visits to subpopulations. This is within only one generation, but further extrapolation is difficult and so this is treated as the minimum population reduction. It therefore qualifies as Vulnerable under criterion A2. It could be Vulnerable under criterion C if overall population numbers are confirmed to be below 10,000 but the actual population numbers are difficult to obtain for this widespread species. The extensive trade in plant parts of this species in traditional medicine markets is the main cause of decline. |
Distribution |
Endemism | South African endemic |
Provincial distribution | Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal |
Range | It occurs from the Qumbu and Tabankulu areas of the northern part of the Eastern Cape, through most of KwaZulu-Natal up to the upper catchment areas of the Mkuze and Umfolozi rivers near Vryheid in South Africa. It has a wide altitudinal range being recorded from 200 up to 1,200 m asl. |
Habitat and Ecology |
Major system | Terrestrial |
Major habitats | Forest, Grassland, Indian Ocean Coastal Belt, Savanna |
Description | This species grows in a variety of habitats, including cliffs and steep, dry slopes in scarp forests and cooler south-facing cliff faces. In certain areas, it is found close to the coast, but it appears more commonly further inland. |
Threats |
| As with most species of Encephalartos in South Africa, removal of mature plants by plant collectors was historically the main threat and still continues albeit at a lower level. Several subpopulations have been impacted by collecting and bark harvesting for medicinal purposes, in some cases severely so. For example, the plants at the type locality at Monteseel have been debarked resulting in mortality and subpopulations near Pietermaritzburg have declined by more than 50% due to bark harvesting. Habitat destruction due to mining activities may also be a threat. |
Population |
There are numerous subpopulations scattered throughout its range, with the number of mature individuals suspected to be between 8,300 and 12,000, but the actual population numbers are difficult to obtain for this widespread species. There has, however, been huge pressure placed on most subpopulations due to the collection of plant material for the trade in traditional medicine. Between 60% and 80% of samples analysed from two of the biggest traditional medicine markets were collected from this species (Cousins et al. 2011), and several large subpopulations have been reduced by >50% due to bark harvesting (C. Dalzell pers. comm.). Repeat photographs taken in 2014 showed a reduction of 40% from sites first photographed between 1945 and 1970 (Okubamichael et al. 2016). This species occurs in naturally fragmented subpopulations and most of the remaining subpopulations are on cliffs (B. Church pers. comm. 2011).
|
Population trend | Decreasing |
Conservation |
| Plants are protected in several nature reserves in KwaZulu-Natal. |
Assessment History |
Taxon assessed |
Status and Criteria |
Citation/Red List version | | Encephalartos natalensis R.A.Dyer & I.Verd. | NT A2ad | Raimondo et al. (2009) | | Encephalartos natalensis R.A.Dyer & I.Verd. | Lower Risk - Conservation Dependent | Scott-Shaw (1999) | | Encephalartos natalensis R.A.Dyer & I.Verd. | Rare | Hilton-Taylor (1996) | | Encephalartos natalensis R.A.Dyer & I.Verd. | Rare | Hall et al. (1980) | |
Bibliography |
Boon, R. 2010. Pooley's Trees of eastern South Africa. Flora and Fauna Publications Trust, Durban.
Donaldson, J.S. 2003. Cycads. Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Cycad Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge, UK.
Goode, D. 1989. Cycads of Africa. Struik/Winchester, Cape Town.
Goode, D. 2001. Cycads of Africa Volume I. D&E Cycads of Africa, Gallo Manor.
Grobbelaar, N. 2003. Cycads. With special reference to the southern African species. (2nd ed.). Nat Grobbelaar, Pretoria.
Hall, A.V., De Winter, M., De Winter, B. and Van Oosterhout, S.A.M. 1980. Threatened plants of southern Africa. South African National Scienctific Programmes Report 45. CSIR, Pretoria.
Hilton-Taylor, C. 1996. Red data list of southern African plants. Strelitzia 4. South African National Botanical Institute, Pretoria.
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.
Scott-Shaw, C.R. 1999. Rare and threatened plants of KwaZulu-Natal and neighbouring regions. KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Service, Pietermaritzburg.
|
Citation |
| Bösenberg, J.D. 2020. Encephalartos natalensis R.A.Dyer & I.Verd. National Assessment: Red List of South African Plants version . Accessed on 2024/12/07 |
Comment on this assessment
