Dec 1, 2011 - Pachypanchax playfairii Gunther, 1866 ...... Caeciliius seychellensis Enderlein, 1931 end. R ... Anopistoscena specularifrons Enderlein, 1912.
GOS- UNDP-GEF Mainstreaming Biodiversity Management into Production Sector Activities
SEYCHELLES KEY BIODIVERSITY AREAS
Output 1: List of species of special concern by Bruno Senterre Elvina Henriette Lindsay Chong-Seng Katy Beaver James Mougal Terence Vel & Justin Gerlach (Draft preliminary report of consultancy)
1st December 2011
CONTENT I
INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................2 I.1 I.2 I.3 I.3.1 I.3.2 I.3.2.1
TERMS OF REFERENCE ......................................................................................2 SELECTION OF THE GAPS OF KNOWLEDGE TO BE ADDRESSED ..............................3 INTRODUCTION TO SOME CONCEPTS AND METHODS ...........................................3 Biodiversity and Conservation value ...............................................................3 Studying patterns of biodiversity......................................................................5 Using indicator taxa as a proxy to overall biodiversity .....................................5
I.3.2.2 Using endemism as a proxy to biodiversity ......................................................7 I.3.2.3 Using diversity indexes rather than species richness ........................................7 I.3.2.4 Using habitat-types as a proxy .........................................................................8 I.3.3 I.4
Assessing conservation values .......................................................................11 OVERALL APPROACH / METHODOLOGY OF THE CONSULTANCY .........................16 MATERIAL AND METHOD FOR THE SPECIES LIST ........................18
II II.1 II.2
CRITERIA USED FOR THE SPECIES EVALUATION ................................................18 CONDITIONS LEADING TO SPECIES SELECTION..................................................23
III
RESULTS ....................................................................................................25
IV
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................27
V
BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................27
VI
APPENDIX 1: SUBMITED WORK PLAN TIME TABLE (TOR) ..........31
VII
APPENDIX 2: THE LIST OF SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN .......32
VII.1 VII.2 VII.3 VII.4 VII.5
AMPHIBIANS ..................................................................................................32 BIRDS, FRESHWATER FISHES AND CRUSTACEAN ..............................................32 MAMMALS AND REPTILES ...............................................................................34 TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER INVERTEBRATES ...........................................35 VASCULAR PLANTS (BRUNO SENTERRE) .........................................................63
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We are grateful to the Global Environment Facility (GEF), for funding this study, and to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Government of Seychelles for having made it possible. This first output is just the beginning and many contributions will need to be acknowledged in the future reports. Suggested citation: Senterre B., Henriette E., Chong-Seng L., Beaver K., Mougal J., Vel T. & Gerlach J. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas. Output 1: List of species of special concern. Report of consultancy, UNDP-GEF project, Ministry of Environment of Seychelles, Victoria, Seychelles, 67 pp.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles Key Biodiversity Areas- Output 1
I
I INTRODUCTION Terms of reference
I.1
The “Mainstreaming Biodiversity Management into Production Sector Activities” (or “Mainstreaming Biodiversity”) Full sized Project was signed in October 2007 between the Government of Seychelles (GOS) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and is funded by a Global Environment Facility (GEF) grant of US$3,600,000. The project is part of the UNDP-GEF portfolio in Seychelles and is implemented under a Programme Coordination Unit (PCU). The objective of the project is to integrate biodiversity conservation into key production sectors of the economy. One of the means of achieving this objective is to seek integration of biodiversity conservation in land use planning and management. The Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) has contracted the present group of consultants to undertake the following medium-term (18 months), part-time assignment: “Assessment of areas of high biodiversity for informed decision-making in future land use planning and management”. This study represent a total of 750 days of consultancy (see terms of reference) distributed among the distinct consultants as follows: B.Senterre (248), E.Henriette (183.6), Justin Gerlach (83), Terence Vel (40.4), Victorin Laboudallon (30), Gérard Rocamora (27), Lindsay Chong-Seng (21) James Mougal (20), Perley Constance (15), André Labiche (10), Roland Nolin (10), Katy Beaver (9). In addition, 50 days are available: to be attributed to unspecified contributors.
The overall objective of the consultancy is to identify sites of biodiversity priority (national areas of biodiversity importance for conservation action) on the granitic islands of Seychelles with the aim of conducting new inventories and evaluating the conservation priorities of these areas and to provide recommendations for gap identification for future research.
The expected outputs of this consultancy are :
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
A detailed work plan describing how the consultancy will be undertaken A stakeholder-endorsed list of species on which the initial collation of spatial data will be based A report summarizing all the collected data on species occurrences Present in a workshop the collected data on the distribution for the selected species and select areas for the implementation of the new inventories A report on the stakeholder-endorsed selection of sites of biodiversity importance in Seychelles as well as a methodology for implementation of the new inventories Completion of new field inventories An approved final report defining the selected sites of biodiversity priority, with recommendations for future research A validation report detailing the deliberations in the workshop and the recommendations made by stakeholders
The present report corresponds to a draft of output 1, the listing of species of special concern. It is submitted for review by stakeholders.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
2
I.2
Selection of the gaps of knowledge to be addressed
In a previous UNDP-GEF study (Senterre et al. 2010a), a metadatabase was compiled on existing references (literature and databases, local and international) on Seychelles “biodiversity” knowledge. This study identified gaps of knowledge, on the one hand, and biodiversity disciplines already well documented, on the other hand. The next step (present consultancy) aims at addressing some of these gaps through compilation of existing data (based on data sources listed in step 1) and implementation of new field inventories, following recommended methodologies (see “best practices” references: Senterre et al. 2010a). Although knowledge on Seychelles biodiversity is quite developed, of course knowledge gaps are countless. Therefore how to choose the gaps to be addressed here? As mentioned by Senterre et al. (2010b: 133), priorities are dependent on the context, i.e. scientific research develops in relation with opportunist factors like project funds, locally available capacities, solicitations from international collaborations, etc. The current context in the Seychelles, related to biodiversity, is mostly related to the “integration of biodiversity conservation in land use planning and management” (UNDP Mainstreaming Biodiversity project). Therefore, the choice of the gap to be addressed in priority has been done, by UNDP Project Coordination Unit (PCU), towards the revision of the National System of Protected Areas through the identification and mapping of Areas of Special Conservation Value. Here after, we briefly introduce the general approach proposed to address this question.
I.3 I.3.1
Introduction to some concepts and methods BIODIVERSITY AND C ONSERVATION VALUE
“Biodiversity" or "Biological diversity" means “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part: this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems” (CBD, Convention on Biological Diversity). This definition emphasizes on the levels of organization of biodiversity (see Figure 1). While biodiversity is simply the amount and pattern of assemblage of the entities mentioned above, conservation value is a more anthropocentric concept, i.e. it includes biodiversity uses. Some species may be more “useful” than others, and the same is true for ecosystems. But on the other hand, more useful species / ecosystems may need the existence of less useful ones for their life cycle, i.e. notion of functioning. In addition, some species thought to be “useless” may well tomorrow reveal to be of important use, as scientific knowledge develops. Therefore, in addition to preserving species and ecosystems that we know are useful, we also want to preserve as many species and ecosystems as possible. The study of conservation values consists in putting all this together, i.e. the descriptive pattern of diversity, their threats and their uses. The need for a System of Protected Areas (SPAs) is directly related to the need for “in situ” conservation (see CBD article 8). Protected Areas should then form a network in which the various components conserve different portions of biological diversity (Vreugdenhil 2003: p.13): The definition of a SPAs is therefore in two steps: first the descriptive study of the patterns of diversity; second the evaluation of the conservation values and constraints.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
3
Figure 1. Levels of organisation of living materials (Duvigneaud 1980).
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
4
I.3.2
STUDYING PATTERNS OF BIODIVERSITY
Defining a SPAs, for in situ conservation of biodiversity, requires, in the very first place, to know where biodiversity is. Ideally, we would like to know the list of all the species present in the Seychelles, and all their geographic occurrences. We also need the same information for the other levels of organization of biodiversity, i.e. ecosystems, genes (e.g. population genetics), etc. Unfortunately such information is not available. Even for the first point, i.e. the basic list of all species, we are still far from having completed the inventory for the Seychelles, see for example fungi (Senterre et al. 2010b). For many groups, we still know very little on the species distribution, e.g. most insects (J.Gerlach, pers.comm.). At ecosystem level, information available in the Seychelles is very scarce. Therefore, how can we address the question on the patterns of biodiversity? Based on literature review and personal reflections, several approaches can be introduced. Using indicator taxa as a proxy to overall biodiversity In many cases, we observe that places with many species in one taxonomic group also hold many species in several other taxonomic groups. For example, tropical rain forests are well known to be much more diverse than temperate forests, and this is true for most taxonomic groups (e.g. Figure 2). It may seem logical indeed that an area with many plant species will be able to include also many species of insects for example; since the factors that created the higher diversity of plants, e.g. long term stability, good ecological conditions, etc., may also apply to insects. I.3.2.1
Based on this observation, it has often been considered that we may analyze the patterns of species diversity not by using all species, which is impossible, but a rather small selection of taxonomic groups, selected based on the amount of knowledge available. Birds, mammals, amphibians and seed plants (excluding ferns and mosses) have been very popular groups for such purpose. Sometimes, only one plant family or part of it is used, e.g. when a complete taxonomic monography has been completed (Figure 3). A great number of studies in tropical rain forests have followed this principle, and resulted in the identification of the most important areas in terms of both species richness and endemism, e.g. see the refuge theories in central Africa In tropical rain forests, when more than one family is used, the selection often focusses only on trees, simply because there are many more data on tree distribution than on non tree species. In this case the selection is not restricted to a given taxonomic group but rather to an “eco-taxonomic group”. Nevertheless, using a selection of species from a given taxonomic or eco-taxonomic group as a proxy to overall biodiversity presents several disadvantages: -The biggest problem is that using species distribution data, irrespective of the selection of species, is much affected by sampling biases and this is true for any country in the world (Vreugdenhil 2003). Indeed, it is well known that biodiversity inventories are strongly biased geographically, i.e. certain areas being more intensively inventoried than others, and many areas remaining unexplored for most groups. Therefore a study of the patterns of biodiversity based on these highly biased data, may just identify highly studied areas rather than highly diverse areas. The study of gaps of exploration is an important prerequisite to biodiversity studies and new field inventories. Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
5
Figure 2. Global distribution of biodiversity based on the species numbers of vascular plants (Barthlott et al. 1999).
Figure 3. Areas of high species diversity in central Africa for two sections of the genus Begonia (Begoniaceae), used as indicators of forest refuge areas during the last glacial eras (Sosef 1996). These supposed refuge areas cumulates both species richness (through conservation effect) and endemism richness (through speciation in isolated refuges), i.e. cumulating widespread species occurrences, paleoendemics and neoendemics.
-The second major problem is that high diversity in one taxonomic group is not always correlated with high diversity in other taxonomic groups. Hill (2002) showed for example, in the Seychelles, that islands with a higher diversity of birds are not those with a higher diversity of plants. This was due to the fact that high bird diversity is highly dependant on the absence of rats. Plants also may be impacted by the presence of rats, but probably to a lower extent and at a different time scale. Another example can be given within plant groups. Montane tropical rain forests are often characterized by lower species richness in vascular plants compared to lowland rain forests, but this relation is not the same if we take non vascular plants, i.e. mosses, which are more abundant and more diverse in the montane forests compared with the lowland. Using endemism as a proxy to biodiversity In the vast areas of lowland rain forests, e.g. in central Africa or Amazonia, regions with relatively similar climate and other environmental factors may show quite different amount of species richness, see glacial refuge theories (Figure 3). Although there is sometimes a correlation between endemism richness and overall biodiversity, the two are not necessarily correlated. For example, montane rain forests generally show a higher level of endemism compared to lowland rain forests, but smaller species diversity (see above). Therefore, endemism is more directly linked to conservation value assessment. Nevertheless, areas of higher endemism may be important in terms of ecosystem functioning, and therefore in terms of functional diversity at the ecosystem scale. Endemism rates should thus not be considered as proxy to biodiversity richness but can still be considered as part of the “biodiversity”. Methods for analysing quantitatively such patterns have been developed for exemple in Africa (Figure 4).
I.3.2.2
Figure 4. Endemism richness of African seed plants (Kier & Barthlott 2001).
Using diversity indexes rather than species richness In order to solve the first problem explained above, namely sampling biases, other methods for analyzing patterns of species diversity still focus on a selection of taxonomic groups supposed to be correlated to total biodiversity, but areas are compared for similar or at least controlled sampling effort, i.e. number of species for a certain number of specimens collected or records, etc. Based on such data, it is then possible to use many distinct statistical treatments in order to take into account differences of sampling effort, and to take into account differences in the evenness of the species, i.e. the distribution of individuals among a certain number of species. For example, two stands sampled with 100 trees each would have
I.3.2.3
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
7
distinct evenness if in one stand 50 species are represented by 2 individuals each, while in the other stand, the same 50 species are represented by only one individual each, except for one species with 51 individuals. Based on the use of such diversity indexes, a selection of sites, that are supposed to be of high biodiversity, may be selected for new field inventories with controlled sampling effort, in order to rank these sites for biological diversity. The other major advantage is that biodiversity indexes calculated in stand plots allow taking into consideration the levels of beta-diversity, i.e. we can compare diversity of sites and habitat-types (Figure 5). The main problems of this method are: -Exactly as for the previous section, no taxon is necessarily a good indicator of the diversity of another -Some habitat types may appear to be relatively species-poor or to have low species diversity, like typically mangroves, high mountain vegetation, and most other highly dynamic or specialized habitat-types. Some of these habitats may even lack any endemic species, e.g. mangroves. But as suggested earlier in this document, biologically less diverse habitats may nevertheless play a fundamental functional role. -The a priori selection of the sites to be assessed is partly subjective. -Seasonality is not captured or would need important funding to allow a team of specialists to visit all the areas more than once Figure 5. Model predictions of Fisher’s alpha values for trees with diameter at breast height ‡ 10 cm in 573 inventory plots in the rain forests of West Africa and Atlantic Central Africa (Parmentier et al. 2011).
Using habitat-types as a proxy In the previous sections, we focused on species diversity, but biodiversity is much more than that. Most experienced field naturalists will have a good idea of the areas of higher conservation value and / or higher diversity simply by looking at a landscape, at maps or at aerial photographs, or by looking at the vegetation structure of a given stand. About the “art of photo-interpretation”, Zonneveld (1989) said: “One recognizes the [land] units on an aerial photograph as one recognizes a person depicted by just the density of silver grains on a piece of paper. This may happen without conscious detailed analysis or reasoning, but in a glance,
I.3.2.4
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
8
based on previously collected knowledge that usually may be unconscious.” An experienced naturalist often knows where he/she is used to finding many species, many rare ones and many interesting discoveries. Most often he/she cannot give a clear argumentation and this is mostly because many distinct parameters are taken into consideration, many of them quite difficult to explain with words, like canopy texture, colours, land forms, or the context, such as difficulty of access, altitude, relative position to inselbergs, ravines, rivers or high mountains, etc. This approach is often combined with some knowledge on rare or endemic species distribution. It has been the main method used in the Seychelles for the definition of areas of high diversity and / or high conservation value: see Jeffrey (1962; further discussed by Swabey , 1970, and Procter , 1973), Carlström (1996) and Senterre (2009). Following Vreugdenhil et al. (2003), the best way to preserve many representative species is by preserving representative ecosystems, i.e. by protecting natural vegetation. The ecosystem, or habitat-types, approach is therefore mostly conservation oriented. Nevertheless, in a context of diversity assessment, this approach is also applicable: if we compare two sites, the one with the higher ecological diversity, or the higher diversity of ecological conditions, or habitat-types, is expected to contain more species than a more ecologically homogeneous site. The diversity of habitat-types in a given area is therefore directly related to beta-diversity, and is sometimes used as a proxy to gamma-diversity, i.e. the total diversity of the area (Figure 6). Consequently, when the species diversity / richness of two sites are compared (gammadiversity), one needs to take into consideration eventual differences in beta-diversity for these two sites. One site may be more species rich than the other simply because it includes more habitat-types, but a given habitat-type may be less diverse compared to the other site. Figure 6. Alpha-, beta- and gamma-diversity defined respectively as the diversity intra-community (i.e. of a given stand ecosystem), the diversity, or species turn over, from one community to the other (inter-communities) and the total diversity of a landscape or geographic area composed by several habitat-types.
In addition to the fact that the habitat-types approach allows taking into consideration more levels of biodiversity, the larger scale of this approach results in another major advantage: it can be studied through remote sensing methods and therefore the problem of sampling bias can be reduced. Aerial photographs and satellite images can be analysed and combined with knowledge on the distribution of determinant environmental factors (i.e. associated with certain habitat-types and thus with their conservation value) using the powerful tools of Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The main difficulties with the ecosystem approach are: -The conception of ecosystem units, and habitat-types, is not as well known as the species concept. We can study the distribution of certain species mostly because taxonomy exists, i.e. because we can put “conventional” names on certain types of organisms, or individuals. If a colleague tells us that he saw Northea hornei (Kapisen) in a given area, we mostly know
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
9
what he is talking about. But if a colleague tells us that he saw a “pristine mist forest” in a given area, this is a piece of information that remains relatively unclear. Saying a “pristine mist forest” is no more than summarising the observed forest stand as a shortlist of its characteristics. If we take again our previous example, and if we imagine that species nomenclature (taxonomy) did not exist, what would be the value of the information brought by a colleague who would tell us that he saw a “tree with dark green leaves, with brownish lower surface, and abundant white latex”? Therefore, it is very important to understand that taxonomy is a practical method, or better said an arbitrary language used to represent conceptualized groups of similar individuals, i.e. species concepts. It is important to remember that species do not exist in nature, only organisms exist. If we accept to classify many unique organisms into species, for practical reasons, why can’t we accept to classify many unique stand ecosystems into habitat-types? Describing species does not necessarily mean that all Homo sapiens individuals have the same genome and lived the same life experiences. Why would we consider that describing habitat-types necessarily means that distinct stands classified into the same habitat-type have the same species composition, the same ecological modifiers, and the same life or evolution history? -The other major problem that impedes the ecosystem approach, compared to the species approach, is that ecosystem stands (i.e. individuals of meso-ecosystem) cannot be put into a press, dried and stored in a museum during several centuries. Taxonomy entirely relies on the collection of reference specimens, or “type” specimens, as a permanent concrete reference more or less accessible to anybody who wants to see it. On the contrary, the ecosystem stand used to describe a given habitat-type will remain on the field, sometimes in hardly accessible areas, and will not stop evolving through the years. Therefore, much more than for species description, the habitat-types description is of paramount importance. If we go on with the analogies between species and ecosystem levels, we can emphasize the fact that glossaries of taxonomic terminology have been the subject of many studies and publications over the last few centuries. It is far from being the case for the description of habitat-types. What are the characters of habitats? The study of the description of habitattypes and the fine-tuning of a glossary of characters is much younger than for species description, i.e. about a century. Such characters include for example floristic composition, vegetation physiognomy (vegetation structure, leaf types and phenology, etc.), climate, land forms, soil types, biogeographic patterns, etc. (see Di Gregorio 2005; Grossman et al. 1998). -As a consequence of the difficulty of naming and especially conceiving habitat-types, the conception of functional links between these entities of biodiversity is also difficult to understand and subject to discussions. As for species, ecosystems have life cycles. A given stand ecosystem once initiates its development, becomes mature and later senescent before being replaced by the next “generation”. Juvenile stages (pioneer) will differ from mature stages (climax), and the ecosystem will evolve from one generation to the next, changing partly its species composition. In analogy, juveniles and mature stages of a species individual look different and species evolve from one generation to the next, changing partly its genetic composition. If we consider a large stand, ecologically homogeneous, the ecosystem occurring on this stand would correspond to a certain type at maturity, e.g. a lowland rain forest. In reality, at a given moment in time, such a large ecologically homogeneous stand would include a mosaic of several units at different stages of development, from pioneer to climax. These units, which Oldeman (1990) called “ecounits”, are functionally closely linked. This overall heterogeneity of the stand given in example would therefore hide the unity of the stand, being a constantly changing mosaic which has in common the same climax (which of course evolves from one generation to the next, with or without the help of anthropic species introductions). These ideas emphasize on the importance of conceiving “potential vegetation types”.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
10
I.3.3 A SSESSING CONSERVATION VALUES In the previous chapter, we introduced some methods for the study of the distribution patterns of biodiversity, and for understanding the factors responsible for such patterns. Since resources available for conservation efforts are limited, we need to define priorities based on these distribution patterns and other factors. Such priorities can be defined for species, habitats or areas. There are six main types of criteria for the establishment of the conservation value: the inner diversity (diversity or richness of the components), the rarity, the irreplaceability (or uniqueness), the vulnerability (trends and threats), the socio-economic value, and the representativeness (complementarity) (Table 1, p.14).
A. Criteria Diversity The diversity criterion is widely used at habitat and site levels. Habitats with a higher species diversity and / or richness will have a higher conservation value (all other criteria being constant). For sites, those combining a higher species and habitat richness or diversity will have higher conservation value. At species level, the criterion diversity is less often used. We can define it in analogy with the other levels, i.e. a species with a higher genes richness and / or diversity. Rarity Rarity mostly applies to species level. Endemic species have a restricted distribution range and therefore a higher conservation value than widespread species. But the global or general geographic range is not the only criteria for rarity. For example some fern species of the Seychelles have a very wide range (up the Pacific Ocean) but are extremely rare throughout their range (suffusively rare species: Mills & Schwartz 2005; Schoener 1987). Finally, the ecological rarity can also be considered: an endemic species occupying a wide range of habitat types would not be treated the same as an endemic species found in only one habitat type. Therefore, rarity can be defined at several geographical scales (global, regional, national, etc.), considering additional criteria such as population size and habitat range (Rabinowitz 1981; Vreugdenhil et al. 2003: p.47). Rarity can be established based on the following set of criteria: -Global geographical range (area of occupation) -Population size -Number of sub-populations (fragmentation / aggregation) -Sub-population size -National geographical range (area of occupation) -National population size -National number of sub-populations -National number of islands where present -National sub-population size -Ecological range (ecological rarity, see chapter 7) At habitat level, the rarity includes the rarity of the habitat itself (based on analogous criteria) and the rarity of its components, i.e. a habitat containing rare species will have a higher conservation value. This is also true at site level, but then rarity of habitats present in the site is also considered.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
11
Irreplaceability (uniqueness) The irreplaceability (or uniqueness) of a site is the degree to which geographic (or spatial) options for conservation will be lost if that particular site is lost (Pressey et al. 1994). Irreplaceability is closely linked to rarity, e.g. a locality containing the only known population of a species (i.e. a local endemic) would be irreplaceable. Sites that hold significant fractions of a species’ entire population during particular periods of the year (e.g., migratory bottlenecks and routes) are also highly irreplaceable (Langhammer et al. 2007). At habitat level, this criterion has not been used although it is relevant. At species level, the irreplaceability criterion is even less evident, or less explicitly mentioned in the literature. Nevertheless, the particular interest in endemic species belonging to endemic monotypic1 genera is an example: if the species becomes extinct, the whole lineage is lost. The higher the rank of the monotypic taxon, the higher its conservation value, e.g. the Medusagynaceae in the Seychelles. Vulnerability (trends and threats) To establish conservation priorities, rarity is not enough. Some rare species may be spreading while others regressing. It is therefore important to consider the trend of the population size, and the determinant factors related to such trends (mostly threats). -Proportion of reproductive population -Generation length -Trends in population size (observed and / or predicted, based on reversibility, trend determinism and the presence or absence of the identified factor of the trend). As previously, the vulnerability can be assessed at habitat and site levels based on their own vulnerability and / or on the vulnerability of some of their constituents. At habitat and site levels, the vulnerability criterion includes the presence, abundance and trends in invasive species populations, or other sources of degradation. For a given habitat, the most important locality to be preserved will be the most pristine one; this is not to be confounded with the criterion representativeness. Socio-economic value The rarity and threat of a species are not all. For two species with similar rarity, we will attribute more importance to the one which is more "useful". For example, the Mapou-d-gran bwa (Pisonia sechellarum), is rarer compared to the Koko-d-mer (Lodoicea maldivica), but if we have to chose which one will be the priority for conservation, it will be the Koko-d-mer, because it has a high economic and cultural value. At habitat level, forests (for example) have higher economic value than glacis due to the ecological services they provide, like water supply, etc. Among forests, cloud forests have a higher value for the same reason (i.e. contribute more to water supply, and other ecological services). In addition, cloud forests have most of the other criteria also in favour of a higher conservation value (mostly rarity). Representativeness (complementarity) Representativeness is a criterion that has only recently become more widely applied for the selection of conservation areas, i.e. site level (Austin & Margules 1986; Grossman et al. 1998). At site level, representativeness explicitly attempts to include the range of natural variation of both biotic and abiotic features (e.g., landforms, soils, elevation zones) of a region 1
A monotypic genus or family contains only one species. When a genus or family contains only few species but more than one, it is called a paucispecific taxon (for more details, see Aubréville 1970 and Senterre 2005). Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
12
within a system of preserves (Austin & Margules 1986). To assess the representativeness of particular conservation areas, coarser-scale descriptions of the regional patterns of environmental and biological variability are required, as well as the environmental relationships of the biota, and the actual biotic distribution patterns. At habitat level, the representativeness of a given "individual" of habitat (i.e. a given stand) will depend on the proportion of the species associated with such habitat that are present. This criterion, at this level, is rarely used and is generally covered by the criteria diversity and vulnerability: a given individual of habitat which is highly invaded will contain less constituents of the native composition, and an individual of habitat with a high diversity value will generally include more native species associated with this habitat. Such considerations are included in the important plant areas concept (see "best sites" in Langhammer et al. 2007, for both the presence of a species and a habitat).
B. Classification systems for conservation value Species conservation value At species level, there is a system widely accepted for assessing the conservation value, i.e. the IUCN categories of threatened species (Figure 7: Iucn 2001, 2006). This system integrates the rarity of the species with trends and previsions on population size. Variants of this system have been proposed that consider more restricted geographical scale (more relevant for isolated small islands) and that include the socio-economic criterion: see Bañares et al. 1998; Burger & Stampfli 2005; Huber & Ismail 2006; Miller et al. 2007; Milner-Gulland et al. 2006. Figure 7. Structure of the IUCN Red List Categories (IUCN 2011).
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
13
Habitats conservation value Analogous systems to IUCN for habitat level are much less common, and should not be confused with the IUCN system of protected areas categories (which are management categories applied to sites and only partly related with conservation value: Boitani et al. 2008). The most widely used and most relevant system was defined in relation with the International Vegetation Classification System (Grossman et al. 1998: p.60). Sites conservation value Site-scale approach integrates species and habitat level approaches, i.e. the prioritization of sites will depend on the prioritization of species and habitats. One of the first system developed was based on Important Bird Areas (IBAs: Osieck & Morzer Bruyns 1981) and has later been applied to other taxonomic groups: Important Plant Areas (IPAs: Anderson 2002), Prime Butterfly Areas, Important Mammal Areas. The concept of Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) combines all these systems (Langhammer et al. 2007: p.5). The KBA system is based on four criteria: vulnerability (but only of species: IUCN threat categories), irreplaceability (> 5% of global population at site), rarity (restricted-range species) and representativeness (best sites concept). The main weakness of this system is that it is based on only few criteria and it poorly integrates the ecosystem approach. Another famous system is based on the definition of biodiversity "hotspots" (Myers et al. 2000, Figure 8). This system is based mostly on diversity and vulnerability criteria, and only partly rarity. It is mostly designed for wider scales, i.e. not site-scales but regional scales. Nevertheless, it has sometimes been adapted to small regions, e.g. areas of exceptionally high biodiversity (Gerlach 2008). Figure 8. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities (Myers et al. 2000).
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
14
The most comprehensive and integrated approach (among the documents consulted) has been developed as a result of a World Bank project for the mapping of ecosystems of central America (Meerman & Sabido 2001; Meyrat et al. 2002). The Honduran part of that map was used to evaluate the presence and gaps of ecosystem representation in the protected areas system. A MS-Excel based spreadsheet evaluation programme called “MICOSYS” was used to compare the relative importance of each area and to design alternative models for protected areas system for different scenarios of conservation security and socio-economic benefits (Vreugdenhil 2002; Vreugdenhil et al. 2003). The remarkable strength of this system is that it is based on strong ecological principles. It integrates species distribution data with a coherent system of habitat types and corresponding vegetation maps (based on the UNESCO physiognomic-ecologic system). It includes many more criteria than the KBA approach, and is more powerful, but it needs more input data (vegetation maps). It is enriched with some new considerations on species survival (Minimum Viable Population and Minimum Area requirements). This system is country-size independent and may be applied anywhere in the world. It is very flexible and may be complemented with other methods, particularly KBAs. For a detailed description of this system, see Vreugdenhil et al. (2003). Table 1. Synthesis of the main criteria contributing to the conception of conservation values at the species, ecosystem and regional / site scales. Criterion
Species
diversity (diversity or species with many genes richness of the components)
Ecosystems habitats with many species
rarity
species with few occurrences habitats with few occurrences
irreplaceability (or uniqueness)
e.g. monotypic genera (if the species is lost, the whole lineage is lost)
Regions regions with many habitats and or many species
e.g. regions holding the only known occurrence of a habitat type or a species, or the only reproductive population, etc.
vulnerability (trends a species, rare or not, which a declining habitat type and threats) is threatened (negative trend) (pristine habitats more valuable) socio-economic value a species with cultural and / an ecosystem providing or economic value ecological services (e.g. forests, even secondary, are valuable; cloud forest are the most valuable) representativeness (complementarity)
a stand of habitat type holding regions including a great most of the species associated diversity of landscapes and with that habitat environmental conditions
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
15
I.4 Overall approach / methodology of the consultancy The overall objective is about finding which are the main priority areas for biodiversity conservation, focusing on some of the richest inner islands, i.e. mostly Mahé, Praslin, Silhouette, La Digue and Félicité. And then, make recommendations in order to improve the current National System of Protected Areas and the land use planning. The approach proposed here is based on a hybrid methodology, i.e. not purely species-centred not purely ecosystem-centred, in order to combine the advantages of both approaches (Table 2). Our methodological approach can be described in 8 elements, see hereafter. The elements 1 to 6 correspond to the activities 1 to 8 in the TOR (Appendix 1), and the elements 7 and 8 correspond to the activities 9 to 11 in the TOR. Table 2. Synthesis of the advantages (in bold) and weaknesses of the species-centred vs. ecosystem-centred approaches to analysis of conservation values.
Species-centred
Ecosystem-centred conception of ecosystems or habitat-types conception of species widely understood poorly understood nomenclature of habitat-types still developing nomenclature of species concepts internationally and poorly accepted accepted based partly on remote sensing, i.e. spatially based on spacially highly biased sampling unbiased data little data available, e.g. detailed land cover large amount of data available on identified entities maps too many species to consider and no taxa could sever as diversity of habitat-types high but proxy to overall biodiversity manageable can integrate the species level of poorly integrate the ecosystem level of organization organization needed to integrate quantitative needed to integrate quantitative conservation values conservation values does not directly integrate historical and more easily integrates historical and functional functional factors factors, e.g. endemism does not integrate ecosystem's ecological services integrates ecosystem's ecological services
1. Where do we have rare species ? Knowing where rare species are is quite important, especially at the scale of the Seychelles, because it gives us the list of sites where we should be very careful, i.e. irreplaceable sites. If we lose the site(s), we lose the species. This approach is often associated with the “complementarity methods” (Vreugdenhil et al. 2003). Are these irreplaceable areas distributed throughout Mahé and the other islands, or are they concentrated in specific areas? In the first case, the data would not bring much information for a conservation perspective, but in the second case the data would allow the identification of what we could call “nuclei of conservation areas”. To achieve this, we need to compile all occurrence data for all such rare species, whatever the origin status (endemics or indigenous) and whatever the IUCN threat category. Depending on the diversity of the taxonomic group considered, the quantity of rare species may be high. In this case, the authors will further filter their species list based on any other criterion (see chapter II.2), e.g. IUCN, cultural or economic value, etc. Data deficient taxa should not be considered, except if the author suspects them to be truly rare. 2. Where do we have higher species diversity? The rare species may have the disadvantage of providing somewhat erratic data, i.e. selecting scattered small areas. Rare species distribution does not provide descriptive patterns of overall Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
16
species diversity, and therefore cannot help to analyze the determinant factors responsible for such pattern, which would allow predicting species diversity values in areas poorly inventoried (Parmentier et al. 2011). The data available on Seychelles species distribution will surely not be sufficient to complete a detailed study. But the selection of species of special concern may partly solve the problem of biased sampling of species distribution. These more “interesting” species of special concern are more equally sampled in the areas visited by taxonomists and conservationists, while the other species (including native ones) are inventoried depending on more specific objectives. If possible, all species of special concern should be included in the synthesis of occurrence data. For very large taxonomic groups, only some particularly well studied and well inventoried subgroups could be considered (excluding data deficient groups), e.g. earwigs, crickets, ants, subgroups of beetles, etc. 3. Where do we have higher species conservation value? Species conservation value is a synthetic criterion and is mostly influenced by the IUCN threat categories and origin status. We should therefore include all threatened species, following the IUCN, and list their known occurrences, bearing in mind that some species have not been correctly analysed (according to updated methods) and many are probably data deficient. 4. Where do we have rare habitat-types? This question is analogous to the first one, the methodology also. We will intend to make a list of rare habitat-types and compile known occurrences. 5. Where do we have higher habitat diversity (beta-diversity)? Again by analogy, we will intend to list what we will call “habitats of special concern” and include them in the compilation of known occurrences. Historical maps exist for some islands, based on remote sensing techniques. The idea is to use these historical maps and try to improve them using the concept of potential habitat-types (see chapter I.3.2.4). 6. Where do we have higher habitat conservation value? The conservation value of a given habitat is mostly linked to the threats faced, the ecological services provided, its biogeographic uniqueness and its alpha-diversity (i.e. intra-community species richness). Old maps may be considered, e.g. showing the extent of certain habitats in the past, e.g. mangrove, freshwater marsh, which are threatened habitats. 7. How efficient is the current National System of Protected Areas (NSPAs)? Based on the data compiled, a comparison can be done between protected vs. non-protected areas and some statistics can be calculated to describe the amount of biodiversity represented in the current NSPAs. 8. Which are the priorities to improve the NSPAs? The input data is described above and will allow overlay analyses to combine the criteria listed, i.e. irreplaceable areas, or biologically diverse areas, Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) or Areas of Special Conservation Value (ASCoV), both at species and ecosystem scales. We will propose decision rules to integrate areas within the NSPAs and estimate priorities. Some analyses will be proposed and the decision rules (combination of criteria and parameters, or relative weights) will be discussed with stakeholders in order to improve the NSPAs.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
17
II MATERIAL AND METHOD FOR THE SPECIES LIST II.1
Criteria used for the species evaluation
As explained in the previous chapter, we propose not to select taxa based on available recent taxonomic revisions, abundance of data, or supposed indicator value for overall biodiversity. The main criterion for our choice is conservation oriented, i.e. “species of special concern” such as rare, endangered, threatened, endemic, flagship species, keystone species, indicator species, etc. (Vreugdenhil 1992). Here after, we detail the distinct criteria and sub-criteria considered. We try to dissect the criteria into states and to provide definitions in order to facilitate the evaluation of species (by putting names on concepts). But we will not necessarily intend to enter the values for all criteria and all species, although the possibility to do so will be provided. 1.Rarity Rarity is the most important criterion. It should not be confused with origin status (endemism). Rarity is evaluated within the country, i.e. a rare species in the Seychelles, while endemism is about rarity at a global scale. Rarity should also not be confused with population size: a species may be known from only one big population, another one by many localities with a few individuals. The former species will be considered rare, the latter one not necessarily. Finally, rarity should not be confused with habitat specificity (as opposed to generalist species). A highly specialist species may be rare (geographically) if its habitat is rare, or very common if its habitat is common. It could therefore be rare in one region and common in another. Actually rarity is a composite criterion, i.e. a relatively subjective mixture of several criteria: number of known localities, population size and habitat specificity. Nevertheless, such a subjective synthesis of the mentioned criteria is very useful in practice and has been indeed abundantly discussed in the literature. The most commonly used system is the one proposed by Rabinowitz (1981). We here propose simplifying this system to 5 classes of rarity which can be identified, still more or less subjectively, even when not all criteria are known, e.g. unknown ecological range (Tables 3 and 4). It is important to note that threat aspects are not considered here, in contrast to IUCN status. As we define it here, rarity can be identified for all species. 2.Data level This is a partly subjective criterion which aims at pointing species typically data deficient, in order to distinguish between truly rare species and poorly recorded species (whose actual rarity is totally unknown). Two states are available: -Data deficient
-Not data deficient
Table 3. Simplified system of categories of rarity used in the present study. The correspondence with Rabinowitz classes is indicated in the table above.
Rarity R O F C A
Definition rare, e.g. Gastonia lionnetii, Medusagyne oppositifolia, Vateriopsis seychellarum occasional, e.g. Gastonia sechellarum var. sechellarum, Colea seychellarum, Nepenthes pervillei frequent, e.g. Ixora pudica, Agrostophyllum occidentale common, e.g. Ficus lutea, Passiflora edulis abundant, e.g. Phoenicophorium borsigianum, Cinnamomum verum
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
18
Table 4: Rabinowitz’s (1981) original classification scheme for rare species adapted from Pitman et al. (1999). Population sizes and thereby “rarity” varies resulting from the factors geographic distribution, ecosystem specificity and abundance (or rather density). The total population sizes tend to decreases from top left to bottom right. When considering global survival chances of a species, one must consider all factors that lead to population size. Locally small populations may be kept vital by periodical exchange of individuals from other populations. Capital letters correspond to a simplified system proposed for the present study. The definitions corresponding to these capital letters, a five states criterion, are detailed in the table 3 and by their placement in the Rabinowitz table. If we lack one or several data included in the Rabinowitz system, we can still identify the rarity category in our simplified system, see capital letters indicated in the upper part of the Rabinowitz table.
A
C
A
F
C
A
F
C
C
F
O
R
O
R
F
O
R
O
R
R
3.Global range, i.e. chorologic element There are many ways of describing the global range of a species, e.g. per countries, regions, ecoregions, biogeographic entities (e.g. phytochoria), etc. In a conservation / biodiversity perspective, the latter aspect, i.e. grouping species into chorologic elements, is particularly important if we want to integrate a wider context. This criterion is a more detailed, non country-centered, version of the origin status. States for this criterion have been rarely defined in the literature covering the Seychelles (Pascal et al. 2001; Procter 1984; Rakotondrainibe et al. 1996; Renvoize 1971, 1975, 1979; Summerhayes 1931; Wallace 1892; Wickens 1979). These aspects are out of the scope of this consultancy but we included this note for future development of the database. 4.Global range, Origin status This criterion can be extrapolated from the previous one, which is an optional criterion, i.e. may not always be entered, or even rarely. The origin status (in Seychelles) is the simplified country-centered global range. We include uncertainty among the proposed categories because the identification of the origin status is sometimes quite questionable. -end = endemic -end? = doubtful
ind = indigenous ind? = doubtful
-exo = exotic -exo? = doubtful
5.National range This criterion and the following ones provide increasing levels of details on the geographic range. Here we simply distinguish between species with wide vs. restricted distribution, as per the Rabinowitz’ system.
-more than 1 island group (e.g. inner island and Amirantes), = wide, A or C -in one island group, but more than 3 islands, = wide, C or F -restricted to 2-3 islands, = restricted, O -restricted to one island, = restricted, R 6.National range, island groups The Seychelles are made of two major biogeographic entities, i.e. the inner and outer islands. This criterion allows to distinguish between species restricted to any of these two entities, whatever their origin status, or presence in both. -outer islands -inner islands -both inner and outer islands 7.National range, number of islands of occurrence The number of islands of occurrence and the number of localities are two important criteria, more or less intuitively taken into consideration when assessing the geographic range. We therefore decided to enter these synthetic data in the “Species metadata” table, although they should be deduced directly from the recording of the species occurrence (see next step of the consultancy activities). 8.National range, number of localities of occurrence Localities are defined in a gazetteer of localities, to be compiled in the next output. There will be still some subjectivity in the distinction of close localities, which is left to the careful consideration of the authors / contributors. If a species is present from 10 islands, but from only 1 single locality in each of these islands, the database will be able to show this pattern. 9.Habitat specificity Some species are very poorly specialized, i.e. are competitive in many distinct habitat-types. Such generalist species include for example Lantannyen fey (Phoenicophorium borsigianum). Habitat specialists include for example Baton monsennyer (Angiopteris madagascariensis) or Mapou-d-gran bwa (Pisonia sechellarum), both being montane forest ravines specialists, the former being geographically widespread and the latter being geographically rare with a fragmented distribution. Nevertheless, the habitat specificity is a very difficult and subjective criterion to assess, and it should not be considered as an important criterion as the geographical range. For species being not especially generalists nor specialists, habitat specificity can be left empty. -wide: not restricted to one habitat-type -narrow, restricted to one habitat-type 10.Fragmented distribution (disjunct) What exactly is the importance of fragmented distribution, and what exactly do we mean? At a (supra-)regional scale, examples of species with fragmented (or disjunct) distribution are relatively easy to find and have been abundantly documented in biogeographical studies (Cox 2001; Jürgens 1997). Such patterns have commonly been interpreted as the result of fractioning of a previously un-fragmented distribution due to mountain rising, continental drift, rising sea level, climate change (i.e. vicariance), local extinctions within the range, or as the result of exceptional long-distance dispersal events. At an infra-regional scale fragmented distribution may often be linked to habitat destruction due to human activities.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
20
In all the examples given above, the fragmented nature of the species distribution is the result of a major change in the environment, at different time scales. Such fragmentation process, especially at shorter time scales, has often been considered as a factor of extinction, and this is why, for example, systems of protected areas (i.e. protected from certain human activities) are to be designed so that the protected areas form a network of elements of sufficient size. Therefore, the fragmentation of the distribution of a species is not considered for the evaluation of its rarity sensu stricto (see Rabinowitz’s classes), but it is a criterion related to potential threat effects. On the other hand, some species have a naturally and especially stable fragmented pattern of distribution. This is the case for all species specialized in fragmented habitat-types, e.g. mangroves, riverine forests, montane forests, inselbergs, etc. Such species have in common that they generally developed functional adaptation to (relatively) long distance dispersal. Such species may be able to survive with small disjunct populations. Specialist species of such habitat-types, which would not have such adaptations, would soon or later develop into micro-endemic species, e.g. the sections of Begonia mentioned above (see Figure 3), or become extinct. Habitat specialists with poor dispersal capacities are thus very sensitive taxa. Therefore, there is no rule; fragmented distribution patterns may be associated with extinction, stability or even speciation. What is important is that the conservation strategies will surely need to take into account such distribution pattern and its supposed determinism. In conclusion, we propose to use the following states for the criterion fragmentation: -historical fragmentation: species absent from suitable habitat-types (within the preferences of the species) occurring largely between the known populations, i.e. absence can’t be explained by ecological reasons or species rarity, and may result from vicariance or long distance dispersal. -archipelago-like habitat fragmentation: high mountain habitats, mangroves, inselbergs, etc. -island fragmentation: when the distribution is fragmented among several islands, and there is no major gap of unoccupied suitable habitats within the overall range (which would qualify first for historical fragmentation). The fragmentation may be the result of sea level change, and biota may have developed islands syndrome, i.e. have become adapted to archipelagolike distribution (even if its habitat is not originally of fragmented nature, e.g. lowland forest, or wide ecological range). -network-like habitat fragmentation: ravine, riverine, wetlands, lava flows, etc. -irregular fragmentation: linked to human or other disaster factors, e.g. fire. -un-fragmented: rarely, e.g. mostly for very rare species, or widespread generalists or unfragmented habitat specialists, mostly in continental regions, etc. If a species combines more than one of the categories proposed above, only one category is entered which is the one higher up in the list. For example, a species with an archipelago-like habitat fragmentation (e.g. montane belt), occurring on several islands (e.g. Mahé and Silhouette), would be qualified as “archipelago-like habitat fragmentation”. The case of anthropic fragmentation is more complicated. Except for few areas on earth, most of our environment have been deeply impacted / fragmented by humans. Therefore putting that kind of fragmentation on top of the list would not be very useful. Here we should not confuse fragmentation and threat, the latter being developed later in our text. Whatever the type of fragmentation in the distribution of a species, this may be more or less impacted, further fragmented, as a consequence of human impact. Therefore, the state ‘irregular fragmentation” should indeed be placed down in our list, and selected when the other states do not apply.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
21
Fragmentation should not be confused with population size and dominance. For example, rare species with scattered individuals may appear fragmented, but should not be categorized as “historical fragmentation”. In this case the absence of the species from suitable habitats occurring between known stands could be explained by ecosystem functioning and not a historical reduction of an originally more widespread taxon. 11.Population size class (overall) This criterion is derived from the following one, but can be estimated with more or less uncertainty even when exact population estimates do not exist. It corresponds to one of the Rabinowitz’s criteria. -large: if not especially small -small 12.Population size (overall) This criterion (the known or estimated number of individuals) is especially useful for relatively rare species, i.e. species known from a very reduced number of individuals and for which population estimates do exist. 13.Dominance (local population size) This criterion is analogous to geographic distribution fragmentation but at a local scale, or stand scale. Individuals can form close populations and even form mono-dominant stands, often being considered “invasive” when of exotic origin. Other species can occur in nature as isolated individuals, or as small groups of scattered individuals at stand scale. Of course this may be dependent on the habitat-types, i.e. a given species may be dominant in a given habitat-type and dominated in another one. What should be considered here is the species potential (generally observed in the habitat-type corresponding to the species optimum). The categories of dominance proposed here are a simplified version of the Braun-Blanquet coefficients (Braun-Blanquet 1932; Van Der Maarel 1979). -dominant: equivalent of Braun-Blanquet coefficient 4 or 5 -co-dominant equivalent of Braun-Blanquet coefficient 3 or 4 -dominated / widespread at stand scale: equivalent of Braun-Blanquet coefficient 1 or 2 -isolated: equivalent of Braun-Blanquet coefficient r or + 14.Threat type The intension here is not to have a very detailed field, but simply the possibility to enter a brief comment when a species is known to be under a specific threat, e.g. Bwa marmay. If no threat is to be mentioned, or if none is clearly known, the field is left empty. Note also that most species are affected by habitat destruction, but here we would enter this state only when we estimate that this threat concretely threatens a species more than the others. -over collection -habitat destruction -competition / predation from exotic species 15.IUCN threat categories for species We simply enter the most recent IUCN assessment for evaluated species. In rare occasions, if the authors personal knowledge on a given species emphasize a IUCN status which could be updated, such update can be made, ideally then mentioning the change in the “comments” field. Distinction should be made between “Non Evaluated” and “Not Listed”.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
22
16.Evaluation level In many cases, we will not have time or will not have the required information to enter all the criteria listed above. Therefore, we add this current field in order to know the degree of details reached in the assessment of a given species, and therefore to know where information gaps are still present. -full evaluation -fast evaluation -unevaluated
II.2
Conditions leading to species selection
As explained above, the main criterion is rarity. All species assessed as R or O will be included. Previously to that filter, only native species are selected, or exceptionally also species of doubtful origin status. Non terrestrial species are included only if their life cycle depends patly on terrestrial areas, e.g. sea turtles and seabirds. For very diverse groups like insects, rare species that are clearly data deficient will not be included (e.g. about 500 insect species, J.Gerlach, pers.comm.). In other groups, if supposed rare species are data deficient, they may still be included (depending on time and personal views of authors). These species will not be used for the search of species occurrences, for the evaluation of biodiversity and conservation value patterns, but will be useful for providing recommendations on species needing more data collection. Such lists of data deficient species may be used during new inventories, among other things. Species known from only 1 locality, or very few localities, should be included if the author considers that these species are probably truly rare (i.e. not data deficient, or exceptionally also some data deficient species if supposed truly rare for any other reason). For diverse groups, such species may be numerous. For plants, we can include species like Gastonia lionnetii, or forgotten species like Lautembergia neraudiana or Korthalsella opuntia. At the end, if we have many species known from 1 locality only, it is still many data, and we can see whether there is a pattern of distribution of these rare species. Therefore, as many truly rare species as possible will be included, within the limits of the current consultancy (see terms of references, i.e. number of days allocated to that activity). If a species is rare and has been typically poorly collected, but if in addition we know that this species is associated with a rare habitat-type (e.g. montane old growth forest) or a threatened habitat-type (wetlands), the species would still be a good candidate for our list of species of special concern. The other important criterion is the IUCN threat categories because, as for “rarity”, it is a composite criterion mixing a number of other criteria, and because these IUCN threat categories are found in published literature. Our list will include all species listed as EX, EW, CR, EN, VU, and eventually NT (see Figure 7). However, our list may contain species that are LC (Least Concerned) if the species happens to be rare nationally e.g. Ixobrychus sinensis (Yellow bittern) which is a species that is of least concerned worldwide, but considered to be Critically Endangered in the Seychelles and a good indicator species for the health of marsh ecosystems.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
23
Extinct, or supposed extinct, species will be included because most often such species were recorded in areas that are still natural and could still exist, especially in the context of the Seychelles where exploration has been relatively neglected and taxonomic knowledge is mostly orally transmitted locally. For truly extinct species, good quality occurrence data could not be used to identify site conservation values, but could still contribute to analyses of the patterns of species diversity. Extinct taxa should not be confused with dubious taxa, e.g. Justicia gardineri, recorded once at La Passe (Silhouette). Endemism is related to both conservation value and evolution processes, but species should not be retained based on this criterion only. Common endemics like Latannyen fey are not a major argument for the selection of protected areas since they would occur equally inside and outside the SPAs. The listed species of special concern should not be influenced by ease of identification. Cryptic species, or species poorly known may often contribute significantly to biodiversity and conservation values. If a species is rare, it should be included even if we know that it can be identified only by specialists or if we know that it has been under-recorded. For example, many ferns are obviously rare, although we know that they have been under-recorded, e.g. Antrophyum, etc. The analyses of biodiversity patterns and conservation values are not to be confused with the selection of indicator species for field monitoring. Such indicators may include species whose occurrence is correlated with e.g. certain habitat-types, or old growth forests, which have been identified, based on a more complete data set, as having a relatively high biodiversity / conservation value. Dubious taxa are a distinct problem because they may constitute “taxonomic errors”, false species. For example, see the species complex in Psychotria (dupontiae and pervillei: synonyms or both true species?), etc. In this case, the best is to follow the most recent taxonomic use: 1 species of Nepenthes, 1 species of Northea, Psychotria dupontiae not a true species but synonym of P. pervillei, etc. But still, if the author’s personal knowledge includes recent taxonomic findings, he may include these. For example, we have now found 3 species of Marattiaceae, 1 of them new to science but still unpublished, 1 of them forgotten for a century, and the last one more common. In the plant list, the three species are included and, when we will be looking for species occurrences, we will keep in mind that most of the records previously known for Angiopteris madagascariensis may include misidentifications. A species may also be included if it is a good indicator of ecosystem health. For instance Macrobrachium lar (Kanmaron gran lebra) is not rare nor occasional but is a good indicator species for the health of river ecosystem (likes well oxygenated water).
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
24
III RESULTS A total of 1045 species of special concern have been listed here (see Appendix 2). The number of species of special concern selected increases with the native diversity of the main taxonomic groups considered (Figure 9, Table5). But the percentage of all native species included in our list of species of special concern decreases with the diversity of the main taxonomic groups (Figure 10). Most of the species listed are endemics (73 %), while indigeneous represent 24 %. The number of species with a dubious, unknown or unrecorded origin status is 56. Threatened species (EX, CR, EN, VU) listed are 135 (13 %). Species considered as rare represent 59 % (618 species) of all listed species of special concern, and 18 % of the estimated total number of native species among the groups included in this study. If we consider only the rare species (R, 618 species), 488 of them (80 %) are endemics, and 60 (10 %) are highly threatened (IUCN categories EX, CR, EN). 1000
Figure 9. Number of species of special concern selected (Y) in relation with the total number of native species (X) existing in the major taxonomic groups (see data in Table 5).
100
10
1 1
10
100
1000
120
10000 Figure 10. Percentage of species of special concern selected (Y) in relation with the total number of native species (X) existing in the major taxonomic groups (see data in Table 5).
100 80 60 40 20 0 1
10
100
1000
10000
Table 5. Number of species of special concern and estimated total number of native species for the main taxonomic groups included in the present study.
Taxonomic group Amphibians Birds Freshwater fishes Mammals Reptiles Terrestrial and freshwater invertebrates Vascular plants Total
Species of special concern included 13 34 2 2 18 862 114 1045
Estimated number of native species 13 50 2 2 30 3000 330 3427
Percentage included 100 68 100 100 60 29 35 30
Table 6. Main statistics for the list of species of special concern compiled, grouped by main taxonomic groups (see first column, “CLASS”, in the Appendix 2). (a) Number of species of special concern per origin status.
Taxonomic group Amphibians Birds Freshwater fishes Mammals Reptiles Terrestrial and freshwater invertebrates Vascular plants Total
end 12 15 2 2 18 632 66 747
end,?
exo
exo,? 1
1
17 3 20
1 2
ind 4
2 2 5
200 36 240
ind,? (vide) Total 13 14 34 2 2 18 4 6 862 7 114 11 20 1045
(b) Number of species of special concern per IUCN status.
Taxonomic group Amphibians Birds Freshwater fishes Mammals Reptiles Terrestrial and freshwater invertebrates Vascular plants Total
EX
1 4 8 13
CR
EN
VU
NT
LC
1
3
4
1
24
1 2 6 25 35
3 20 11 37
3 14 29 50
1
1 8 1
1 3
C
A
17
1 1
34
(vide) Total 13 13 1 34 2 2 2 18 817 862 40 114 873 1045
(c) Number of species of special concern per class of rarity.
Taxonomic group Amphibians Birds Freshwater fishes Mammals Reptiles Terrestrial and freshwater invertebrates Vascular plants Total
R 7 9 1 1 9 521 70 618
O 3
F 5 3
(vide) 1 1
1 1 248 23 275
33 4 45
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
36
8 1
54
11
23 17 42
Total 13 34 2 2 18 862 114 1045 26
IV CONCLUSION The current list is not a final one. While searching for species occurrence data, this list will be updated and species may be removed or added. In particular, several lists still include species restricted to the outer islands, and will be removed from the final list. The next steps are: -the input from stakeholders on the present preliminary report -the designing of a database for recording species occurences -the entry of species occurrence data (January-February 2012)
V BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, S. (2002): Identifying Important Plant Areas. Plantlife International, London, UK. Aubréville, A. (1970): A propos de la spéciation dans les forêts tropicales humides - Les genres mono- ou paucispécifiques. - Adansonia 10 (3, sér. 2): 301-307. Austin, M.P. & Margules, C.R. (1986): Assessing representativeness. - In: M.B. Usher (ed.) Wildlife conservation evaluation. Pp. 45-67. - Chapman and Hall, London, UK. Bañares, A., Marrero, M. & Carqué, E. (1998): The Application of Revised IUCN Red List Categories to the national Parks Flora of the Canary Islands. Planta Europa. Pp. 198-204. Boitani, L., Cowling, R.M., Dublin, H.T., Mace, G.M., Parrish, J., Possingham, H.P., Pressey, R.L., Rondinini, C. & Wilson, K.A. (2008): Change the IUCN Protected Area Categories to Reflect Biodiversity Outcomes. - PLoS Biology 6 (3): 436-438. Braun-Blanquet, J. (1932): Plant sociology: the study of plant communities. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 407 pp. Burger, M. & Stampfli, N. (2005): Threat Assessment of the very rare plant taxa of the Seychelles. - Thesis, Institute of Integrative Biology Zurich, ETH, Zurich, 157 pp. Carlström, A. (1996): Areas of Special Conservation Value for the Plants of the Granitic Islands of Seychelles. Consultancy Report, Seychelles Government. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Planning and Environment. Conservation & National Parks Section, Victoria, Seychelles. Cox, C.B. (2001): The biogeographic regions reconsidered. - Journal of Biogeography 28: 511-523. Di Gregorio, A. (2005): Land Cover Classification System (LCCS), version 2: Classification Concepts and User Manual. FAO Environment and Natural Resources Service Series. Vol. 8, FAO, Rome. Gerlach, J. (2008): Setting Conservation Priorities - A Key Biodiversity Areas Analysis for the Seychelles Islands. - The Open Conservation Biology Journal 2: 44-53. Grossman, D.H., Faber-Langendoen, D., Weakley, A.S., Anderson, M., Bourgeron, P., Crawford, R., Goodin, K., Landaal, S., Metzler, K., Patterson, K.D., Pyne, M., Reid, M. & Sneddon, L. (1998): International classification of ecological communities: terrestrial Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
27
vegetation of the United States. Volume I. The National Vegetation Classification System: development, status, and applications., The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, USA, 127 pp. Hill, M.J. (2002): Biodiversity surveys and conservation potential of inner Seychelles islands. - Atoll Research Bulletin 495: 1-272. Huber, M. & Ismail, S. (2006): Suggested IUCN Red List Status of the Endemic Woody Plants of the Inner Seychelles. - Master Thesis, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich (ETH), Institute if Integrative Biology Zurich (ibz), Zürich, 142 pp. IUCN (2001): IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, Version 3.1., International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, United Kingdom. IUCN (2006): Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 6.1. Prepared by the Standards and Petitions Working Group for the IUCN SSC Biodiversity Assessments Sub-Committee in July 2006. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K. IUCN (2011): Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 9.0., Prepared by the Standards and Petitions Subcommittee, 87 pp. Jeffrey, C. (1962): The Botany of the Seychelles (Report by the visiting botanist of the Department of Technical Cooperation Seychelles Botanical Survey, 1961-62). London, 37 pp. Jürgens, N. (1997): Floristic biodiversity and history of African arid regions. - Biodiversity and Conservation 6: 495-514. Kier, G. & Barthlott, W. (2001): Measuring and mapping endemism and species richness: a new methodological approach and its application on the flora of Africa. - Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1513-1529. Langhammer, P.F., Bakarr, M.I., Bennun, L.A., Brooks, T.M., Clay, R.P., Darwall, W., De Silva, N., Edgar, G.J., Eken, G., Fishpool, L.D.C., da Fonseca, G.A.B., Foster, M.N., Knox, D.H., Matiku, P., Radford, E.A., Rodriguez, A.S.L., Salaman, P., Sechrest, W. & Tordoff, A.W. (2007): Identification and Gap Analysis of Key Biodiversity Areas: Targets for Comprehensive Protected Area Systems. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 116 pp. Meerman, J.C. & Sabido, W. (2001): Central American ecosystems map: Belize. Vol. 1, Programme for Belize, Belize City, Belize, 28 pp. Meyrat, A.K., Vreugdenhil, D., Meerman, J.C., Gómez, L.D. & Graham, D.J. (2002): Central American Ecosystems Map: Ecosystem Descriptions. Vol. 2, The World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA. Miller, R.M., Rodriguez, J., Aniskowicz-Fowler, T., Bambaradeniya, C., Boles, R., Eaton, M.A., Gardenfors, U., Keller, V., Molur, S. & Walker, S. (2007): National threatened species listing based on IUCN criteria and regional guidelines: current status and future perspectives. - Conservation Biology 21 (3): 684-696. Mills, M.H. & Schwartz, M.W. (2005): Rare plants at the extremes of distribution: broadly and narrowly distributed rare species. - Biodiversity and Conservation 14: 1401-1420.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
28
Milner-Gulland, E.J., Kreuzberg-Mukhina, E., Grebot, B., Ling, S., Bykova, E., Abdusalamov, I., Bekenov, A., Gärdenfors, U., Hilton-Taylor, C. & Salnikov, V. (2006): Application of IUCN red listing criteria at the regional and national levels: A case study from central Asia. - Biodiversity and conservation 15 (6): 1873-1886. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca, G.A.B. & Kent, J. (2000): Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. - Nature 403 (6772): 853-858. Osieck, E. & Morzer Bruyns, M.F. (1981): Important Bird Areas in the European Community. ICBP, Cambridge (UK). Parmentier, I., Harrigan, R.J., Buermann, W., Mitchard, E.T.A., Saatchi, S., Malhi, Y., Bongers, F., Hawthorne, W.D., Leal, M.E., Lewis, S.L., Nusbaumer, L., Sheil, D., Sosef, M.S.M., Affum-Baffoe, K., Bakayoko, A., Chuyong, G.B., Chatelain, C., Comiskey, J.A., Dauby, G., Doucet, J.-L., Fauset, S., Gautier, L., Gillet, J.-F., Kenfack, D., Kouame, F.N., Kouassi, E.K., Kouka, L.A., Parren, M.P.E., Peh, K.S.H., Reitsma, J.M., Senterre, B., Sonke, B., Sunderland, T.C.H., Swaine, M.D., Tchouto, M.G.P., Thomas, D., Van Valkenburg, J.L.C.H. & Hardy, O.J. (2011): Predicting alpha diversity of African rain forests: models based on climate and satellite-derived data do not perform better than a purely spatial model. - Journal of Biogeography 38 (6): 1164-1176. Pascal, O., Labat, J.-N., Pignal, M. & Soumille, O. (2001): Diversité, affinités phytogéographiques et origines présumées de la flore de Mayotte (Archipel des Comores). Syst. Geogr. Plant 71: 1101-1123. Pressey, R.L., Johnson, I.R. & Wilson, P.D. (1994): Shades of irreplaceability: towards a measure of the contribution of sites to a reservation goal. - Biodiversity and Conservation 3: 242-262. Procter, J. (1973): National parks in the Seychelles. - Biol. Conserv. 5: 153-155. Procter, J. (1984): Floristics of the granitic islands of the Seychelles. - In: D.R. Stoddart (ed.) Biogeography and ecology of the Seychelles islands. Pp. 209-220. - Junk Publishers, The Hague. Rabinowitz, D. (1981): Seven forms of rarity. - In: H. Synge (ed.) The biological aspects of rare plant conservation. Pp. 205-218. - Wiley, New York, USA. Rakotondrainibe, F., Badré, F. & Stefanović, S. (1996): Etude floristique et phytogéographique des Ptéridophytes des îles du sud-ouest de l'ocean Indien. - In: W.R. Lourenço (ed.) Biogéographie de Madagascar. Pp. 109-120. - ORSTOM, Paris. Renvoize, S.A. (1971): The Origin and Distribution of the Flora of Aldabra. A Discussion on the Results of the Royal Society Expedition to Aldabra 1967-68. - Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 260 (836): 227-236. Renvoize, S.A. (1975): A floristic analysis of the western Indian Ocean coral islands. - Kew Bulletin 30 (1): 133-152. Renvoize, S.A. (1979): The origins of lndian Ocean island floras. - In: D. Bramwell (ed.) Plants and islands. Pp. 107-129. - Academic Press, London. Schoener, T.W. (1987): The geographical distribution of rarity. - Oecologia 74: 161-173.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
29
Senterre, B. (2005): Recherches méthodologiques pour la typologie de la végétation et la phytogéographie des forêts denses d'Afrique tropicale. - Ph.D. thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Laboratoire de Botanique systématique et de Phytosociologie, Bruxelles, 456 pp. Senterre, B. (2009): Forest fire risk assessment on Seychelles main granitic islands. Consultancy report, Ministry of Environment-UNDP-GEF project, Mahé, Seychelles, 61 pp. Senterre, B., Rocamora, G., Bijoux, J., Mortimer, J.A. & Gerlach, J. (2010a): Seychelles biodiversity metadatabase. Consultancy Report, Ministry of Environment-UNDP-GEF project. 5 volumes, 1 Access file, 2 Excel files, Victoria, Seychelles. Senterre, B., Rocamora, G., Bijoux, J., Mortimer, J.A. & Gerlach, J. (2010b): Seychelles biodiversity metadatabase. Output 5: Priority Gap Analysis on Seychelles’ Biodiversity knowledge and information. Consultancy Report, Ministry of Environment-UNDP-GEF project, Victoria, Seychelles, 270 pp. Sosef, M.S.M. (1996): Begonias and African rain forest refuges: general aspects and recent progress. - In: L.J.G. van der Maesen (ed.) The Biodiversity of african plants. Pp. 602-611. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. Summerhayes, V.S. (1931): An enumeration of the Angiosperms of the Seychelles Archipelago. - Trans. Linn. Soc. 19: 261-299. Swabey, C. (1970): The endemic flora of the Seychelles islands and its conservation. - Biol. Conserv. 2 (4): 171-177. van der Maarel, E. (1979): Transformation of cover-abundance values in phytosociology and its effects on community similarity. - Vegetatio 39 (2): 97-114. Vreugdenhil, D. (1992): Biodiversity Protection and Investment Needs for the Minimum Conservation System in Costa Rica. Consultancy Report, DHV Consultants, under Contract by the World Bank, Washington D.C., USA. Vreugdenhil, D. (2002): MICOSYS, Application Honduras “National Parks Model”, Evaluation spreadsheet in MS Excel, (version 3, with contributions by P. R. House. Prepared for PPROBAP, Project COHDEFOR/UNDP/World Bank/GEF. URL http://www.birdlist.org/nature_management/national_parks/micosys.zip Vreugdenhil, D., Terborgh, J., Cleef, A.M., Sinitsyn, M., Boere, G.C., Archaga, V.L. & Prins, H.H.T. (2003): Comprehensive Protected Areas System Composition and Monitoring. WICE, USA, Shepherdstown, 106 pp. Wallace, A.R. (1892): Island life or the phenomena and causes of insular faunas and floras, including a revision and attempted solution of the problem of geographical climates. Macmillan and Co., London and New York. Wickens, G.E. (1979): Speculations on seed dispersal and the flora of the Aldabra Archipelago. - Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 286: 85-97.
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
30
VI APPENDIX 1: SUBMITED WORK PLAN TIME TABLE (TOR) Activity Development of workplans/team 1-Select taxa of special concern 2-Compile existing spatial data on the selected species 3-Stakeholders consultation for oral knowledge input 4-Consolidate the spatial data on the selected species into a GIS database 5-Develop suggested methodologies for complete inventories of selected areas of biodiversity priority 6a-Define and discuss criteria for selection of KBAs 6b-Define and discuss a selection of KBAs 6c-Define and discuss inventories methodologies for the KBAs 7-Conduct inventories within selected KBAs candidates 8-Synthesis of historical data and data collected through the new inventories 9-Define and map the assessed KBAs 10-Provide recommendations 11-Validate findings in a workshop Total
Sep11
Oct11
Nov11
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
Dec11
Jan12
Feb12
Mar12
Apr12
MaySep-12
Oct-12
Nov-12
Dec-12
Jan-13
Total 4 40 102 93
35
33 52
280
50 35 3 23 750
31
VII APPENDIX 2: THE LIST OF SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN Species are classified per alphabetical order of CLASS (not necessarily the Class taxonomic level), then FAMILY and SPECIES. Criteria for species selection are detailed in the section II.1, as well as the categories for Origin, IUCN (see also section I.3.3) and Rarity. Names used are not necessarily according to the most recent valid name but often according to the most commonly used name in the Seychelles (except for misapplied names). VII.1 Amphibians
(Lindsay Chong-Seng) : 13 entries
CLASS
FAMILY
SPECIES
Vernacular names
Origin IUCN Rarity
Anura
Hyperoliidae
Tachynenis seychellensis
Krapo
end
Anura
Ranidae
Ptychadaena mascareniensis
Anura
Sooglossidae
Nesomantis thomasseti
Pti grenwir
end
R
Anura
Sooglossidae
Sooglossus gardineri
Pti grenwir
end
F
Anura
Sooglossidae
Sooglossus pipilodryas
end
R
Anura
Sooglossidae
Sooglossus sechellensis
Pti grenwir
end
R
Gymnophiona
Caecilidae
Grandisonia alternans
LEVERTER NWANR
end
F
Gymnophiona
Caecilidae
Grandisonia brevis
LEVERTER NWANR
end
R
Gymnophiona
Caecilidae
Grandisonia diminutiva
LEVERTER NWANR
end
R
Gymnophiona
Caecilidae
Grandisonia larvata
end
F
Gymnophiona
Caecilidae
Grandisonia sechellensis
end
R
Gymnophiona
Caecilidae
Hypogeophis rostratus
end
F
Gymnophiona
Caecilidae
Praslinia cooperi
end
R
VII.2 Birds,
F
exo,?
freshwater fishes and Crustacean (Elvina Henriette): 46 entries
CLASS
FAMILY
SPECIES
Vernacular names
Origin IUCN Rarity
Landbird
Acrocephalidae
Acrocephalus sechellensis Oustalet, 1877
Pti merl de zil
end
VU
Landbird
Apodidae
Aerodramus elaphrus
Zirondel
end
VU
R
Landbird
Ardeidae
Bubulcus ibis seychellarum Salomonsen, 1934
Madanm paton
end
LC
A
Landbird
Ardeidae
Butorides striatus degens
Mannik
end
LC
C
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
32
R
Landbird
Columbidae
Alectroenas pulcherrima Scopoli, 1786
Pizon olande
end
LC
C
Landbird
Columbidae
Streptopelia picturata rostrata
Tourtrel dezil
end
LC
C
Landbird
Columbidae
Streptopelia picturata Temminck, 1813
Tourtrel dezil
exo
LC
C
Landbird
Falconidae
Falco araea Oberholser, 1917
Katiti
end
VU
O
Landbird
Monarchidae
Terpsiphone corvina Newton, 1867
Vev
end
CR
R
Landbird
Muscicapidae
Copsychus sechellarum Newton, 1865
Pisantez
end
EN
R
Landbird
Nectariniidae
Nectarinia dussumieri Hartlaub, 1860
Kolibri
end
LC
C
Landbird
Ploceidae
Foudia sechellarum Newton, 1865
Tok tok
end
NT
O
Landbird
Psittacidae
Coracopsis (nigra) barklyi
Kato nwanr
end
VU
R
Landbird
Pycnonotidae
Hypsipetes crassirostris E.Newton, 1867
Merl
end
LC
C
Landbird
Rallidae
Gallinula chloropus Linnaeus, 1758
Poul do
ind
LC
C
Landbird
Strigidae
Otus insularis Tristram, 1880
Syer
end
EN
R
Landbird
Zosteropidae
Zosterops modestus Newton, 1867
Zwazo linet
end
EN
R
Seabirds
Fregatidae
Fregata ariel
Pti fregat
LC
C
Seabirds
Fregatidae
Fregata minor
Gran fregat
LC
C
Seabirds
Phaethontidae
Phaethon lepturus
Payanke lake blan
LC
F
Seabirds
Phaethontidae
Phaethon rubricauda
Payanke lake rouz
LC
O
Seabirds
Procellariidae
Puffinus lherminieriLesson, 1839
Riga
LC
C
Seabirds
Procellariidae
Puffinus pacificus Gmelin, 1789
Fouke dezil
LC
C
Seabirds
Sternidae
Anous stolidus Linnaeus, 1758
Makwa
LC
C
Seabirds
Sternidae
Anous tenuirostris Temminck, 1823
Kelek
Seabirds
Sternidae
Gygis alba Sparrman, 1786
Golan blan
LC
C
Seabirds
Sternidae
Sterna anaethetus
Fansen
LC
F
Seabirds
Sternidae
Sterna dougallii Montagu, 1813
Dyanman roz
LC
Seabirds
Sternidae
Sterna fuscata Linnaeus, 1766
Golet
LC
C
Seabirds
Sternidae
Thalasseus bengalensis Lesson, 1831
Pti golan sardin
LC
F
Shorebirds
Ardeidae
Ardea cinerea
Floranten sann
ind
LC
C
Shorebirds
Ardeidae
Bubulcus ibis ibis
Madanm paton
ind
LC
C
Shorebirds
Ardeidae
Ixobrychus sinensis Gmelin, 1789
Makak zonn
ind
LC
R
Shorebirds
Ardeidae
Nycticorax nycticorax Linnaeus, 1758
Mannik lannwit
LC
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
33
C
Actinopterygii
Aplocheilidae
Pachypanchax playfairii Gunther, 1866
Gourzon
end
Gobioidei
Ptereleotridae
Parioglossus multiradiatus
Larkansyel
end
R
Crustaceans
Atyidae
Cardina longirostris Milne-Edwards, 1837
Sevret gran labek
ind
C
Crustaceans
Atyidae
Cardina serratirostris De Man, 1892
Sevret tas blan
ind
C
Crustaceans
Atyidae
Cardina typus Milne-Edwards, 1837
Sevret
ind
C
Crustaceans
Atyidae
Caridina similis Bouvier, 1904
Sevret labek kourt
end
C
Crustaceans
Grapsidae
Sesarmops impressum Milne-Edwards, 1837
Krab larivyer
ind
C
Crustaceans
Grapsidae
Varuna litterata Fabricius, 1798
Krab mangliye
ind
C
Crustaceans
Palaemonidae
Macrobrachium equidens Dana, 1852
Kanmaron pitakle
ind
C
Crustaceans
Palaemonidae
Macrobrachium idae Heller, 1862
Kanmaron zonn
ind
C
Crustaceans
Palaemonidae
Macrobrachium lar Fabricius, 1798
Kanmaron gran lebra
ind
C
Crustaceans
Potamonautidae
Seychellum alluaudi A.Milne-Edwards & Bouvier, 1893
Krab montanny
end
VII.3 Mammals
A
LC
A
and reptiles (Terence Vel): 20 entries
CLASS
FAMILY
SPECIES
Vernacular names
Origin IUCN Rarity
Mammalia
Emballonuridae
Coleura seychellensis (Peters, 1868)
Sousouri Bannan
end
CR
R
Mammalia
Pteropodidae
Pteropus seychellensis (Milne-Edwards, 1877)
Sousouri
end
LC
C
Reptilia
Chamaeleonidae
Archaius tigris (Kuhl, 1820)
Kameleon
end
EN
R
Reptilia
Colubridae
Boaedon geometricus (Schlegel, 1837)
Koulev zonn
end
EN
R
Reptilia
Colubridae
Lycognathophis Seychellensis (Schlegel, 1837)
Koulev gri
end
EN
R
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Ailuronyx seychellensis (Duméril & Bibron, 1834)
Bronze eye Gecko
end
LC
A
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Ailuronyx tachyscopaeus (Gerlach & Canning, 1996)
Dwarf Bronze Gecko
end
NT
R
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Ailuronyx trachygaster (Duméril & Bibron, 1851)
Giant Bronze Gecko
end
VU
R
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Phelsuma abbotti (Stejneger, 1893)
Lezar ver
end
LC
O
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Phelsuma astriata astriata (Tornier, 1901)
Lezar ver
end
LC
A
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Phelsuma sundbergi (Rendahl, 1939)
Lezar ver
end
LC
A
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Phelsuma sundbergi longinsulae (Rendahl, 1939)
Lezar ver
end
VU
A
Reptilia
Gekkonidae
Urocotyledon inexpectata (steiner, 1893)
Lezar Disik
end
LC
A
Reptilia
Pelomedusidae
Pelusios castanoides ssp. Intergularis (Bour, 1983)
Torti Soupap
end
CR
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
34
Reptilia
Pelomedusidae
Pelusios seychellensis (Siebenrock, 1906)
Torti Soupap
end
EX
Reptilia
Pelomedusidae
Pelusios subniger ssp. Parietalis (Bour, 1983)
Torti Soupap
end
CR
R
Reptilia
Scincidae
Mabuya sechellensis (Dumeril & Bibron, 1836)
Mangouya
end
LC
A
Reptilia
Scincidae
Mabuya wrightii (Boulenger 1887)
Teng Teng
end
LC
A
Reptilia
Scincidae
Pamelaesscinus gardineri (Boulenger, 1909)
Borrowing Skink
end
LC
R
Reptilia
Testudinidae
Geochelone gigantea (Schweigger, 1812)
Torti - d - ter / Karoz
end
VU
A
VII.4 Terrestrial
R
and freshwater invertebrates (Justin Gerlach): 852 entries
CLASS
FAMILY
SPECIES
Vernacular names
Origin IUCN Rarity
Acari
HOLOTHYIDAE
Dicrogonatus gardineri Warburton, 1912
end
R
Acari
HOLOTHYIDAE
Dicrogonatus niger (Thon, 1906)
end
O
Acari
HOLOTHYIDAE
Michaelothrus seychellensis (Thon, 1906)
end
R
Acari
HOLOTHYIDAE
Sternothyrus braueri (Thon, 1906)
end
F
Amblypygi
Phrynichidae
Phrynichus scaber (Gervais, 1844)
end
R
Arachnida
ARANEIDAE
Prasonica anarillea Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
ARANEIDAE
Prasonicella marsa Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
BARYCHELIDAE
Idioctis intertidalis (Benoit & Legendre, 1968)
ind
R
Arachnida
BARYCHELIDAE
Sason sechellanum Simon, 1898
end
O
Arachnida
CLUBIONIDAE
Clubiona hitchinsi Saaristo, 2002
end
O
Arachnida
CLUBIONIDAE
Clubiona mahensis Simon, 1893
end
O
Arachnida
CORINNIDAE
Paccius quadridentatus Simon, 1898
end
R
Arachnida
CTENIZIDAE
Conothele truncicola Saaristo, 2002
end
R
Arachnida
OCHYROCERATIDAE
Ouette ouette Saaristo, 1998
end
R
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Aridella bowleri Saaristo, 2002
end
R
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Cousinea keeleyi Saaristo, 2001
end
O
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Farqua quadrimaculata Saaristo, 2001
end
R
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Ischnothyrella jivani (Benoit, 1979)
end
R
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Ischnothyreus serpentinum Saaristo, 2001
end
R
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Lionneta gerlachi Saaristo, 2001
end
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
35
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Lionneta silhouettei Benoit, 1979
end
O
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Opopaea probosciella Saaristo, 2001
end
O
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Opopaea suspecta Saaristo, 2002
end
O
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Orchestina maureen Saaristo, 2001
end
O
Arachnida
OONOPIDAE
Silhouettella assumptia Saaristo, 2001
end
R
Arachnida
Palpimanidae
Hybosida dauban Platnick, 1979
end
R
Arachnida
Palpimanidae
Hybosida lucida Simon, 1898
end
R
Arachnida
PHOLCIDAE
Cenemus silhouette Saaristo, 2001
end
R
Arachnida
PHOLCIDAE
Spermophorides lascars Saaristo, 2001
end
R
Arachnida
PRODIDOMIDAE
Prodida stella Saaristo, 2002
end
R
Arachnida
SALTICIDAE
Baviola luteosignata Wanless, 1984
end
R
Arachnida
SALTICIDAE
Hasarius mahensis Wanless, 1984
end
R
Arachnida
SALTICIDAE
Microbianor golovatchi Logunov, 2000
end
R
Arachnida
SALTICIDAE
Sadies trifasciata Wanless, 1984
end
R
Arachnida
SALTICIDAE
Salpesia soricina Simon, 1901
end
R
Arachnida
SCYTODIDAE
Scytodes pholcoides Simon, 1898
end
R
Arachnida
SEGESTRIIDAE
Ariadna ustulata Simon, 1898
end
R
Arachnida
SPARASSIDAE
Pleurotus braueri Simon, 1898
end
Arachnida
SPARASSIDAE
Stipax triangulifer Simon, 1898
end
Arachnida
SPARASSIDAE
Thomasettia seychellana Hirst, 1911
end
Arachnida
SYMPHYTOGNATHIDAE Patu silho Saaristo, 1996
end
R
Arachnida
TELEMIDAE
Seychellia lodoiceae Brignoli, 1980
end
R
Arachnida
TELEMIDAE
Theridion nagorum Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
THERAPHOSIDAE
Nesiergus gardineri (Hirst, 1911)
end
R
Arachnida
THERAPHOSIDAE
Nesiergus halophilus Benoit, 1978
end
R
Arachnida
THERAPHOSIDAE
Nesiergus insulans Simon, 1903
end
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Argyrodes chionus Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Dipoena hasra Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Dipoena pristea Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Eyryopis helcra Roberts, 1983
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
36
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Moneta coercervus (Roberts, 1978)
end
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Theridion cloxum Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Theridion mehlum Roberts, 1983
end
R
Arachnida
THERIDIIDAE
Theridion palanum Roberts 1983
end
R
Arachnida
Theridiosomatidae
Andasta siltte, Saaristo, 1996
end
R
Arachnida
Theridiosomatidae
Zoma zoma Saaristo, 1996
end
R
Arachnida
ZORIDAE
Voraptus tenellus (Simon, 1893)
ind
R
Archaeognatha
Machilidae
Corethromachilis brevipalpis Carpenter, 1916
end
O
Archaeognatha
Machilidae
Corethromachilis gardineri Carpenter, 1916
end
O
Archaeognatha
Machilidae
Corethromachilis gibba (Paclt, 1969)
end
O
Archaeognatha
Machilidae
Pseudomachilanus sechellarum Paclt, 1969
end
O
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Balta crassivenosa (Bolivar, 1924)
end
R
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Delosia ornata Bolivar, 1924
end
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Hololeptoblatta minor Bolivar, 1924
end
R
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Hololeptoblatta pandanicola Bolivar, 1924
end
R
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Margatteoidea amoena (Bolivar, 1924)
end
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Miriamrothschildia aldabrensis (Bolivar, 1924)
end
C
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Miriamrothschildia biplagiata (Bolivar, 1924)
end
R
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Miriamrotshcildia mahensis Roth & Rivalut, 2002
end
R
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Sliferia similis (Bolivar, 1924)
end
R
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Theganopteryx grisea Bolivar, 1924
end
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Theganopteryx liturata Bolivar, 1924
end
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Theganopteryx lunulata Bolivar, 1924
end
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Theganopteryx minuta Bolivar, 1924
end
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Theganopteryx scotti Bolivar, 1924
end
Blattodea
Blattidae
Neostylopyga rhombifolia (Stoll, 1813)
end
R
Blattodea
Nocticolidae
Nocticola gerlachi Roth, 2003
end
R
Blattodea
Polyphagidae
Holocompsa pusilla Bolivar, 1924
end
R
Chilopoda
MECISTOCEPHALIDAE
Mecistocephalus cyclops (Brölemann, 1896)
end
R
Chilopoda
MECISTOCEPHALIDAE
Mecistocephalus megalodon Bonato & Minelli, 2009
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
37
Chilopoda
MECISTOCEPHALIDAE
Mecistocephalus sechellarum Demange, 1981
end
R
Chilopoda
Scutigeridae
Seychellonema gerlachi Butler, Edgecombe, Ball & Giribert, 2010
end
R
Coleoptera
Aderidae
Aderus clavicornis (Champion, 1917)
end
R
Coleoptera
Aderidae
Aderus seychellarum (Champion, 1917)
end
R
Coleoptera
Aderidae
Aderus torticornis (Champion, 1917)
end
R
Coleoptera
Anthicidae
Eurygenius convexicollis Champion, 1917
end
R
Coleoptera
Anthicidae
Eurygenius fragilicornis Champion, 1917
end
R
Coleoptera
Carabidae
end
R
Coleoptera
Carabidae
Argiloborus scotti Jeannel, 1937 Myriochile melancholica (Fabricius, 1798) perplexa (Dejean, 1825)
ind
F
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Anomoderus rugosicollis Aurivillius, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Ceresium albopubens Fairmaire, 1891
end
O
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Ceresium flavipes (Fabricius, 1792)
ind
C
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Coptops aedificator (Fabricius, 1792)
exo,?
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Coptops humerosa Fairmaire, 1872
end
O
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Discoblax wrighti (Waterhouse, 1880)
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Exocentrus subreticulatus Breuning, 1957
ind
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Hyllisia quadricollis (Fairmaire, 1871)
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Idobrium femoratum Aurivillius, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Idobrium sechellarum Aurivillius, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Idobrium voeltzkowi Kolbe, 1902
end
O
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Iresiodes aldabrensis (Linell, 1897)
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Mahenes demelti Breuning, 1980
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Mahenes multifasciatus Vives, 2007
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Mahenes semifasciatus Aurivillius,1922
end
O
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Micronoemia albosignata Aurivillius, 1922
end
O
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Micronoemia bifasciata Aurivillius, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Micronoemia gerlachi Vives, 2007
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Micronoemia glauca Aurivillius, 1922
O
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Obrium nitidicolle Aurivillius, 1922
end
F
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Olenecamptus bilobus (Fabricius, 1801)
exo,?
C
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
R
38
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Paradandamis fuscovittatus Aurivillius, 1922
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Paralocus semitibialis Fairmaire, 1898
ind
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Platygnathus seychellarum Aurivillius, 1922
ind
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Prosoplus dentatus (Olivier, 1792)
ind
O
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Pterolophia instabilis Aurivillius, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Ropica sechellarum Breuning, 1957
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Stromatium barbatum (Fabricius, 1775)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Sybra fauveli (Théry, 1897)
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Sybra geminata (Klug, 1832)
exo
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Tragocephala alluaudi Lameere, 1893
end
R
Coleoptera
Cerambycidae
Xystrocera globosa (Olivier, 1795)
ind
C
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Biaksha minor Maulik, 1931
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Bikasha fortipunctata Maulik, 1931
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Chaetocnema sundara Maulik, 1931
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Diacantha unifasciata (Olivier, 1808)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Pratima costata Maulik, 1931
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Pratima variabilis Maulik, 1931
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Rhabdotohispa scotti Maulik, 1913
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Rhyparida scotti Maulik, 1931
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Rhyparida seychellensis Maulik, 1931
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Seychellaltica gardineri Biondi, 2002
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Seychellaltica krishna (Maulik, 1931)
end
R
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Seychellaltica mahensis (Maulik, 1931)
end
R
Coleoptera
Cleridae
Pallenis laterisignatus Schenkling, 1921
end
R
Coleoptera
Cleridae
Steocylidrus dimidiatus Schenkling, 1921
end
R
Coleoptera
Cleridae
Tarsostenus univittatus Rossi
ind
R
Coleoptera
Coccinellidae
Scymnus cryptogonoides Sicard, 1912
end
R
Coleoptera
Coccinellidae
Scymnus lunulatus Sicard, 1912
end
R
Coleoptera
Coccinellidae
Scymnus voeltzkowi (Weise, 1910)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Achoragus tener Jordan, 1914
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
R
39
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Araecerus fasciculatus (Degeer, 1775)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Baridomorpha triplaris Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Baris seychellensis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Camptorrhinus brullei Bohem, 1826
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Chaerorrhinodes tenuiculus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Choragus bolus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Choragus ornatus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Coccotrypes carpophagus (Hornung, 1842)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Coccotrypes excavatus Schedl, 1977
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Coccotrypes parvus Sampson, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Contexta murina Jordan, 1901
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Coptus latiusculus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Corynaecia scotti Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cosmopolites sordidus (Germar, 1824)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cossonus incivilis (Fabricius, 1871)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cratopus muticus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cryphalus pallidus Eichhoff, 1871
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cycloterinus caecus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cycloterinus canaliculatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cycloterinus carinifer Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cycloterinus erosus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cycloterinus foveatus Kolbe, 1910
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cycloterinus unicristatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Cycloterodes sechellarum Kolbe, 1910
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Dendroctonomorphus muriceus Champion, 1914
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Diocalandra frumenti (Fabricius, 1801)
ind,?
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Dryophthorus lymexylon (Fabricius, 1792)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Dysnos aethiops Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Endaeopsis delicatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Epitaphius licheneus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
40
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Eucycloteres terreus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Eugnoristus braueri Kolbe, 1910
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Euops viriditinctus Champion, 1914
end
F
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Euphasalis amitina Kolbe, 1910
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Gonotrachelus quinquecarinatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Himatinum breviusculum Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Himatinum confluum Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Himatinum rugipenne Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Homalorrhynchus rubricatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Homalorrhynchus serripes Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Homalorrhynchus verschaffeltiae Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Hormiscops laetus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Hormiscops sorbrinus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Hormiscops tesselatus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Hormiscops tibialis Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Hypopentathrum microcephalum Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Lasiotrupis clavigera Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Melarhinus incrustatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Microhimatium pubescens Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Microplatymerus lodoiceivorus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Microtrupis longipennis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Microtrupis piligera Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Microtrupis puncticeps Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Myocaldanra exarata (Boheman, 1838)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Orthotemnus filiformis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Pentarthrum longicolle Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Pentarthrum punctatissimum Champion 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Pentarthrum seychellarum Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phaenicobates rufitarsis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phlaeophagosoma conicicolle Champion, 1914
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
41
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates alatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates albosetosus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates curvipes Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates cuspidatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates cylindricus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates depressirostris Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates duplovestitus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates fortirostris Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates foveiventris Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates gibbirostris Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates hispidulus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates lodoiceae Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates nigrolimbatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates pandanicola Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates parallelus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates peropacus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates praslinensis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates sebertensis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates simplex Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates stevensoniae Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates tenuis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobates vittatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobatopsis echinatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicobatopsis septiceps Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Phoenicogenus inermis Champion,1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Platypus lepidus Chapius, 1866
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Polytus mellerborgi (Boheman, 1838)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Proeces compressicollis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Proeces silvestris (Kolbe, 1910)
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Rhetogenes sexcristatus Champion, 1914
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
42
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Rhetogenes spurcus Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Rhyncolosoma dubium (Gahan, 1900)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Sciatrophus fuscus Sampson, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Sciretinus dimidiatus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Scirtetinus eumelas Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Scirtetinus luteipes Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Scirtetinus piceus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Scolytogenes confragosus (Sampson, 1914)
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Scolytogenes crenatus (Sampson, 1914)
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Shutea acminatum (Champion, 1914)
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Sintorops alloeus Jordan, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Sitophilus linearis (Herbst, 1797)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Sphodrias magdaloides Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenomimus orientalis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenopentarthrum pandanae Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis biformis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis caliginosa Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis conicicephala Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis convexiuscula Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis crassipes Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis dumetorum Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis filum Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis lodoiceicola Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis nemoralis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis nitidula Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis parallela Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis polita Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis rufipes (Fairmaire, 1902)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis sericata Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis silvicola Champion, 1914
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
43
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Stenotrupis tarsalis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Sycites pilicornis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Tanyomus palmicola Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Temnorrhamphus latirostris Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Tetragonorrhamphus tuberculirostirs Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Trapezirrhynchus silhouettensis Champion, 1914
end
R
Coleoptera
Curculiondiae
Trochorhopalus strangulatus (Gyllenhal, 1838)
ind
R
Coleoptera
Elmidae
Microlara mahensis Jäch, 1993
end
R
Coleoptera
Gyrinidae
Dineutus subspinosus (Klug, 1834)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Abraeomorphus atomarius (Sharp, 1885)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Aeletes daubani (Scott, 1913)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Aeletes davidsoni (Scott, 1913)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Aeletes fryeri (Scott, 1913)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Bacanius rombophorus (Aubé, 1843)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Carcinops troglodytes (Paykull, 1811)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Platylomalus alluaudi (Schmidt, 1893)
end
R
Coleoptera
Histeridae
Saprinus erichsoni Marseul, 1855
end
R
Coleoptera
Hydrophilidae
Bourdonnaisia mahensis Scott, 1913
end
F
Coleoptera
Hydrophilidae
Bourdonnaisia silhouettae Scott, 1913
end
F
Coleoptera
Limnichidae
Hyphalus crowsoni Hernando & Ribera, 2000
end
R
Coleoptera
Limnichidae
Hyphalus madli Hernando & Ribera, 2004
end
R
Coleoptera
Scarabaeudae
Nesohoplias senecionis Scott, 1912
end
R
Coleoptera
Scarabaeudae
Saprosites palmarum (Scott, 1913)
end
R
Coleoptera
Scarabaeudae
Saprosites pygmaeus Harold, 1877
end
R
Coleoptera
Scydmaenidae
Stenichnoteras montanum Scott, 1921
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Amarygmus seychellensis Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Bradymerus hispidus Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Bradymerus scotti Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Bradymerus seychellensis Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Cacoplesia annulipes Champion, 1917
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
44
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Camarothelops braueri Kolbe, 1910
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Cylindrosia foveifrons Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Enicmosoma punctum Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Heterophyllus atomus Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Mahena cuprea Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Palorus mahenus Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Palorus praslinensis Gebien, 1922 Platydema inaequidens (Fairmaire, 1880) seychellarum Gebien, 1922
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Pseudhadrus braueri Kolbe, 1910
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Pseudhadrus seriatus Kolbe, 1910
end
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Pulposipes herculeanus Solier, 1848
end
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Rhipidandrus speculifrons (Gebien, 1922)
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Tagalus cavifrons (Fairmaire, 1893)
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Tyrtaeus singularis Grouvelle, 1918
end
R
Coleoptera
Tenebrionidae
Uloma crenatostiata Fairmaire, 1868
end
R
Dermaptera
Anisolabididae
Antisolabis scotti (Burr, 1910)
end
R
Dermaptera
Anisolabididae
Antisolabis seychellensis (Brindle, 1976)
end
R
Dermaptera
Forficulidae
Hypurgus ova (Bormans, 1883)
ind,?
C
Dermaptera
Spongiphoridae
Chaetolabia fryeri (Burr, 1910)
end
R
Dermaptera
Spongiphoridae
Chaetospania gardineri (Burr, 1910)
end
R
Diplopoda
Pachybolidae
Eucarlia alluaudi (Brölemann, 1896)
end
R
Diplopoda
Pachybolidae
Eucarlia hoffmani Golvatch & Korsós, 1992
end,?
R
Diplopoda
Pachybolidae
Eucarlia mauriesi Golovatch & Korsós, 1992.
end
R
Diplopoda
Pachybolidae
Spiromanes braueri (Attems, 1900)
end
O
Diplopoda
Paradoxosomatidae
Orthomorpha crinita Attems, 1900
end
R
Diplopoda
Siphonophoridae
Siphonophora silhouettensis Attems, 1900
end
O
Diplopoda
Siphonotidae
Rhinotus albifrons Mauriès, 1980
end
R
Diplopoda
Siphonotidae
Rhinotus densepilosus Golovatch & Korsós, 1984
end
O
Diplopoda
Siphonotidae
Rhinotus vanmoli Mauriès, 1980
end
F
Diplopoda
Spirobolidae
Spirobolus praslinus Saussure & Zehntner, 1902
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
45
R CR
R
Diplopoda
Spirostreptidae
Sechelleptus unilineatus Golovatch & Korsós, 1992
end
F
Diptera
Agromyzidae
Cerodontha piliseta (Becker, 1903)
ind
O
Diptera
Agromyzidae
Ophiomyia centrosematis (de Meijere, 1840)
ind
O
Diptera
Asilidae
Trichardis nigrescens (Ricardo, 1925)
ind
O
Diptera
Asteiidae
Asteia lambi Duda, 1927
ind
O
Diptera
Asteiidae
Phlebosotera striata Hendel, 1931
ind
O
Diptera
Bombyliidae
Anthrax johanni Zaitzev, 1997
ind
O
Diptera
Bombyliidae
Exoprosopa aldabrae Greathead, 1976
end
O
Diptera
Bombyliidae
Geron dilutus Bowden, 1974
ind
O
Diptera
Bombyliidae
Geron seychellarum Greathead, 1983
end
O
Diptera
Bombyliidae
Micomitra famula (Bezzi, 1923)
end
O
Diptera
Bombyliidae
Villa aldabrae Greathead, 1976
end
O
Diptera
Calliphoridae
Cosmina calida Bezzi, 1923
end
O
Diptera
Calliphoridae
Cosmina gerlachae Verves & Khrokalo, 2009
end
O
Diptera
Calliphoridae
Rhinia coxendix (Villeneuve, 1916)
ind
O
Diptera
Canacidae
Isocanace briani Mathis, 1982
ind
O
Diptera
Canacidae
Nocticanace actites Mathis & Wirth, 1979
ind
O
Diptera
Canacidae
Nocticanace flavipalpis Mathis & Wirth, 1979
ind
O
Diptera
Canacidae
Tethina ochracea (Hendel, 1913)
ind
O
Diptera
Cecidomyiidae
Asinapta northi Spungis, 2006
end
O
Diptera
Cecidomyiidae
Lepidodiplosis filipes (Kieffer, 1911)
end
O
Diptera
Cecidomyiidae
Seychellepidosis spinosus Spungis, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Bezzia africana Ingram & Macfie, 1923
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Bezzia ornatissima (Kieffer, 1911)
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Culicoides adamskii Wirth, 1990
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Dasyhelea cogani Wirth, 1990
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Dasyhelea fenerivensis de Meillon, 1961
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Dasyhelea hutsoni Wirth, 1990
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Dasyhelea inconspicuosa Carter, Ingram & Macfie, 1921
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Dasyhelea monosticta (Ingram & Macfie 1923)
ind
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
46
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Dasyhelea nigricans Carter, Ingram & Macfie, 1921
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Dasyhelea tamsi Wirth & Messersmith, 1977
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Forcipomyia hutsoni Wirth & Ratanaworaban, 1976
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Forcipomyia psilonata (Kieffer, 1911)
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Forcipomyia pulcherrima Santos Abreu, 1918
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Forcipomyia sexannulata Clastrier, 1983
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Forcipomyia vesicula de Meillon & Wirth, 1983
ind
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Metacanthohelea cogani Wirth & Grogan, 1988
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Nilobezzia scotti (Kieffer, 1911)
end
O
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Stilobezzia spirogyrae Carter, Ingram & Macfie, 1921
ind
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Chironomus seychelleanus Kieffer, 1911
ind
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Clunio gerlachi Sæther, 2004
end
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Larsia pallidissima (Kieffer, 1911)
end
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Polypedilum brunneicorne (Kieffer, 1911)
ind
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Polypedilum glabripenne (Kieffer, 1911)
end
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Polypedilum melanophilum (Kieffer, 1911)
ind
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Pseudosmittia remigula Sæther, 2004
end
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Pseudosmittia triangula (Tokunaga, 1964)
ind
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Semiocladius brevicornis (Tokunaga, 1964)
ind
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Tanypus complanatus Sæther, 2004
end
O
Diptera
Chironomidae
Tanytarsus pallidulus Freeman, 1954
ind
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Anatrichus erinaceus Loew, 1860
ind
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Caderema femorata (Lamb, 1912)
end
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Conioscinella dissimilicornis (Lamb, 1912)
end
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Epimadiza rugosa (de Meijere, 1906)
ind
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Fiebrigella atritibia (Sabrosky, 1951)
ind
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Oscinella acuticornis Becker, 1912
ind
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Pseudogampsocera scutellata (Lamb, 1912)
ind
O
Diptera
Chloropidae
Tricimba armata (Séguy, 1938)
ind
O
Diptera
Clusiidae
Heteromeringia nigrifrons Lamb, 1914
ind
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
47
Diptera
Culicidae
Uranotaenia nepenthes (Theobald, 1912)
ind
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Acropsilus errabundus Lamb, 1922
ind
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Aldabromyia plagiochaeta Meuffels & Grootaert, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Amblypsilopus pallidicornis (Grimshaw, 1901)
ind
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Chaetogonopteron aldabricum Meuffels & Grootaert, 2009
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Chaetogonopteron marronense Meuffels & Grootaert, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Chaetogonopteron seychellense Meuffels & Grootaert, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Ethiosciapus prysjonesi Meuffels & Grootaert, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Hydrophorus praecox (Lehmann, 1822)
ind
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Lichtwardtia aldabrensis Meuffels & Grootaert, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Mascaromyia leptogaster (Thomson, 1869)
ind
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Medetera pachyneura Meuffels & Grootaert, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Paraclius solivagus Lamb, 1922
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Sympycnus allotarsis Meuffels & Grootaert, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Tachytrechus tessellatus (Macquart, 1842)
ind
O
Diptera
Dolichopodidae
Thinophilus indigenus Becker, 1902
ind
O
Diptera
Drosophilidae
Drosophila vallismaia Tsacas, 1984
end
O
Diptera
Drosophilidae
Leucophenga grossipalpis (Lamb, 1914)
end
O
Diptera
Ephydridae
Allotrichoma breviciliatum Canzoneri, 1987
ind
O
Diptera
Ephydridae
Ceropsilopa lacticella Cresson, 1946
ind
O
Diptera
Ephydridae
Schema aldabricum Mathis & Zatwarnicki, 2003
end
O
Diptera
Hippoboscidae
Olfersia aenescens Thomson, 1869
ind
O
Diptera
Hippoboscidae
Olfersia spinifera (Leach, 1817)
ind
O
Diptera
Hybotidae
Parahybos iridipennis Kertesz, 1899
ind
O
Diptera
Lauxaniidae
Homoneura funebricornis (Lamb, 1914)
end
O
Diptera
Lauxaniidae
Homoneura laticosta (Thomson, 1869)
ind
O
Diptera
Lauxaniidae
Homoneura mahensis (Lamb, 1912)
end
O
Diptera
Lauxaniidae
Homoneura terminalis (Loew, 1826)
ind
O
Diptera
Milichidae
Enigmilichia dimorphica Deeming, 1981
ind
O
Diptera
Milichidae
Leptometopa nilssoni Sabrosky, 1987
ind
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
48
Diptera
Muscidae
Atherigona cornicauda Deeming, 1987
end
O
Diptera
Muscidae
Atherigona orientalis Schiner, 1868
ind
O
Diptera
Muscidae
Coenosia setalis Emden, 1940
ind
O
Diptera
Muscidae
Dichaetomyia fasciculifera (Stein, 1910)
end
O
Diptera
Muscidae
Lispe bengalensis Robineau-Desvoidy
ind
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Chonocephalus modestus Disney, 2005
end
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Dohrniphora papuana (Brues, 1905)
ind
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Megaselia aldabrae Disney, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Megaselia extans (Collin, 1912)
end
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Megaselia frontata (Collin, 1912)
ind
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Megaselia pseudomera Disney, 2006
end
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Megaselia senegalensis Disney
ind
O
Diptera
Phoridae
Puliciphora exachatina Disney, 1988
ind
O
Diptera
Pipunculidae
Eudorylas semiopacus (Lamb, 1922)
end
O
Diptera
Platystomatidae
Naupoda inscripta Speiser, 1910
ind
O
Diptera
Sarcophagidae
Ihosyia nomita (Zumpt, 1964)
ind
O
Diptera
Sarcophagidae
Liosarcophaga pyrrhopoda (Bezzi, 1923)
end
O
Diptera
Sarcophagidae
Parasarcophaga hirtipes (Wiedemann, 1830)
ind
O
Diptera
Sarcophagidae
Seselwana aldabrae (Zumpt, 1973)
end
O
Diptera
Scatopsidae
Rhegmoclemina botulus Haenni, 2007
end
O
Diptera
Sciaridae
Epidapus pallidus (Séguy, 1961)
ind
O
Diptera
Sciaridae
Pseudolycoriella setigera (Hardy, 1960)
ind
O
Diptera
Stratiomyiidae
Cardopomyia robusta Kertész, 1916
ind
O
Diptera
Stratiomyiidae
Oplodontha pulchripes (Bigot, 1859)
ind
O
Diptera
Tephritidae
Philophylla seychellensis (Lamb, 1914)
end
O
Diptera
Tephritidae
Psednometopum aldabrense (Lamb, 1914)
end
O
Diptera
Tephritidae
Taomyia ocellata (Lamb, 1914)
end
O
Diptera
Tipulidae
Atypophthalmus mahensis (Edwards, 1912)
end
O
Diptera
Tipulidae
Erioptera maculosa (Edwards, 1912)
end
O
Diptera
Tipulidae
Idiocera aldabrensis (Edwards, 1912)
ind
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
49
Diptera
Tipulidae
Orimarga fryeri Edwards, 1912
end
O
Diptera
Xenasteiidae
Xenasteia aldabrae Hardy, 1980
end
O
Diptera
Xenasteiidae
Xenasteia seychellensis Hardy, 1980
end
O
Ephemeroptera
Leptophlebidae
Hagenulodes braueri Ulmer, 1919
end
O
Ephemeroptera
Leptophlebidae
Maheathraulus scotti (Eaton, 1913)
end
F
Hemiptera
Ceratocombidae
Ceratocombus insularis Reuter, 1893
end
O
Hemiptera
Ceratocombidae
Gen. ? alboclavatus Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Enicocephalidae
Cocles maheensis Villiers, 1975
end
O
Hemiptera
Enicocephalidae
Cocles silhouettensis Villiers, 1975
end
O
Hemiptera
Halobatidae
Gerris cereiventris Signoret, 1862
ind
O
Hemiptera
Halobatidae
Gerris dolosa (Bergroth, 1893)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Halobatidae
Halobates alluaudi Bergroth, 1893
ind
O
Hemiptera
Hebridae
Hebrus seychellensis Polhemus
end
O
Hemiptera
Hydrometridae
Hydrometra ambulator Stal, 1855
ind
O
Hemiptera
Margarodidae
Gigantococcus dilleniae Gerlach, 2010
end
O
Hemiptera
Membracidae
Leptocentrus madli Boulard, 1995
end
O
Hemiptera
Membracidae
Madlinus seychellensis Boulard, 1995
end
O
Hemiptera
Mesoveliidae
Seychellovelia hygrobia Andersen & Polhemus, 2003
end
O
Hemiptera
Nabidae
Arbela elegantula (Stal, 1865)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Nabidae
Prostemma reuteri Kerzhner, 1990
ind
O
Hemiptera
Ochteridae
Ochterus seychellensis Polhemus
end
O
Hemiptera
Pentatomidae
Amirantea aldabrensis Gerlach, 2009
end
O
Hemiptera
Pentatomidae
Amirantea gardineri Distant, 1909
end
O
Hemiptera
Pentatomidae
Carbula limpoponis (Stål, 1853)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Pentatomidae
Stenozygum aldabranum Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Pentatomidae
Stenozygum insularum Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Polyctenidae
Hypoctenes hutsoni Maa, 1970
end
O
Hemiptera
Pyrrhocoridae
Dysdercus faciatus Signoret, 1861
ind
O
Hemiptera
Pyrrhocoridae
Dysdercus nigrofasciatus Stal, 1855
ind
O
Hemiptera
Pyrrhocoridae
Dysdercus ortus Distant, 1909
end
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
50
Hemiptera
Pyrrhocoridae
Scantius forsteri (Fabricius, 1781)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Calphurnioides elongatus Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Emesopsis reticulata (Distant, 1909)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Empicoris rubromaculatus (Blackburn, 1889)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Gardena seychellensis Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Mascaregnasa typica Distant, 1909
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Nagusta maura Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Oncocephalus angulatus Reuter, 1882
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Oncocephalus sordidus Stal, 1855
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Polytoxus modestus Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Quinssyana funeralis Distant, 1913
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Quinssyana typicalis Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Quinssyana varicolor Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Rochonia galeatus Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Stenolemus madagascariensis (Westwood, 1846)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Reduviidae
Triatoma rubrofasciata (DeGeer, 1773)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Saldidae
Salda insignis Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Saldidae
Saldula niveolimbata (Reuter, 1900)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Tingidae
Cantinona praecellens Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Tingidae
Cantinona takamakana Duarte Rodrigues, 1979
end
O
Hemiptera
Tingidae
Cysteochila michelana Duarte Rodrigues, 1982
end
O
Hemiptera
Tingidae
Dulinius unicolor (Signoret, 1861)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Tingidae
Habrochila iolana Drake, 1955
ind
O
Hemiptera
Tingidae
Paracopium insularis Duarte Rodrigues, 1982
ind
O
Hemiptera
Veliidae
Halovelia seychellensis Andersen, 1989 *
end
O
Hemiptera
Veliidae
Microvelia diluta Distant, 1909
ind
O
Hemiptera
Veliidae
Microvelia repentina Distant, 1904
ind
O
Hemiptera
Veliidae
Picaultia pronotalis Distant, 1913
end
O
Hemiptera
Veliidae
Rhagovelia nigricans (Burmeister, 1835)
ind
O
Hemiptera
Veliidae
Salduncula seychellensis Brown, 1956
end
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
51
Hirudinea
Haemadipsidae
Idiobdella seychellensis Harding 1913
end
O
Hirudinea
Haemadipsidae
Mahebdella miranda Richardson, 1978
end
R
Hymenoptera
Apidae
Amegilla antimena (de Saussure, 1890)
ind
O
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Adelomyrmex sc01
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Adelomyrmex sc02
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Adelomyrmex sc03
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Adelomyrmex sc04
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Amblypone besucheti Baroni Urbani, 1978
end
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Amblypone sc01
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Carebra mu01
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Cerapachys sc01
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Crematogaster gibba Emery, 1894
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Crematogaster rasoherinae Forel, 1891
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Discothyrea sc01
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Discothyrea sc02
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Discothyrea sc03
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Discothyrea scm01
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Leptogenys maxillosa (Smith, 1858)
ind
F
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Pheidole braueri Forel, 1897
end
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Pheidole mg015
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Pheidole mg121
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Pheidole sc01
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Pheidole sc02
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Pheidole scm01
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Platythyrea parallela (Smith, 1859)
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Proceratium sc01
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Proceratium sc02
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Proceratium scm01
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Proceratium scm02
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Strumigenys scotti Forel, 1912
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
52
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Tapinoma subtile Santschi, 1911
ind?
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Terataner scotti Forel, 1912
end?
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Tetramorium bicarinatum (Nylander, 1846)
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Tetramorium lanuginosum Mayr, 1870
ind
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Vollenhovia oblonga (Smith, 1860) alluaudi (Emery, 1894)
end
R
Hymenoptera
Formicidae
Vollenhovia piroskae Forel, 1912
end
F
Hymenoptera
Halticidae
Lasioglossum nicolli (Cockerell, 1912)
end
O
Hymenoptera
Megachilidae
Chalicodoma rufiventris (Guérin-Méneville, 1833)
ind
O
Hymenoptera
Megachilidae
Heriades aldabranum (Cockerell, 1912)
end
O
Hymenoptera
Megachilidae
Lithurgus pullatus Vachal, 1903
ind
O
Hymenoptera
Scoliidae
Campsomeriella caelebs (Sichel, 1864)
ind
O
Hymenoptera
Scoliidae
Lobhargita pilosella (de Saussure, 1892)
ind
O
Hymenoptera
Scoliidae
Scolia hyalinata Sichel, 1864
ind
O
Isopoda
Armadillidae
Pseudodiploexochus cuspidatus Ferrara & Taiti, 1985
end
R
Isopoda
Armadillidae
Spherillo maculosus Budde-Lund, 1904
end
Isopoda
Armadillidae
Venezillo parvus (Budde-Lund, 1885)
end
R
Isopoda
Irmaosidae
Irmaos lobatus Ferrara & Taiti, 1983
end
R
Isopoda
Irmaosidae
Irmaos sechellarum Ferrara & Taiti, 1983
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Littorophiloscia aldabrana Ferrara & Taiti, 1985
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Philoscina insularis Ferrara & Taiti, 1985
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Pseudosetaphora lateralis (Budde-Lund, 1913)
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Pseudosetaphora ovata (Budde-Lund, 1913)
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Sechelloscia angustissima (Budde-Lund, 1913)
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Sechelloscia benoiti Ferrara & Taiti, 1983
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Sechelloscia mucronata Ferrara & Taiti, 1983
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Sechelloscia vanmoli Ferrara & Taiti, 1983
end
R
Isopoda
Philosciidae
Setaphora pallidemaculata Budde-Lund, 1913
end
R
Isopoda
Platyarthridae
Trichorhina triocellata Ferrara & Taiti, 1985
end
R
Isopoda
Porcellionidae
Mahehia bicornis Budde-Lund, 1913
end
O
Isopoda
Porcellionidae
Mahehia laticauda Budde-Lund, 1913
end
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
53
R
Isopoda
Porcellionidae
Mahehia maculata Budde-Lund, 1913
end
Isopoda
Porcellionidae
Tura angusta (Budde-Lund, 1913)
ind
Isopoda
Trachelipodidae
Nagurus cristatus (Dollfus, 1891)
end
Isopoda
Trachelipodidae
Nagurus kensleyi Ferrara & Taiti, 1985
end
O
Isoptera
Kalotermitidae
Glyptotermes scotti (Homgren, 1909)
end
F
Isoptera
Kalotermitidae
Procryptotermes fryeri (Holmgren, 1909)
end
F
Lepidoptera
Arctiidae
Argina astraea (Drury, 1773)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Arctiidae
Exilisia subfusca (Fryer, 1912)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Arctiidae
Mahensia seychellarum Fryer, 1912
end
R
Lepidoptera
Arctiidae
Nyctemera seychellensis (Hampson, 1908)
end
F
Lepidoptera
Blastobasidae
Blastobasis intrepida Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Choreutidae
Anthophila gratiosa (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Choreutidae
Anthophila quincyella Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Epermeniidae
Epermenia moza Butler, 1878
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Gelechiidae
Apocritica chromatica Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Gelechiidae
Helcystogramma effera (Meyrick, 1918)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Gelechiidae
Thiotricha tenuis (Walsingham, 1891) subtenuis Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Gracilariidae
Acrocercops angelica Meyrick, 1919
end
R
Lepidoptera
Gracilariidae
Caloptilia tirantella Legrand, 1966
end
R
Lepidoptera
Gracilariidae
Cuphodes luxuriosa Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Gracilariidae
Cuphodes tridora Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Gracilariidae
Parectopa parolca (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Heliodinidae
Epicroesa sp.
end
O
Lepidoptera
Hesperidae
Pelopidas mathias mathias (Fabricius, 1775)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Lyonetiidae
Lyonetia probolactis Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Metachandidae
Metachanda coetivyellaLegrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Metachandidae
Metachanda columnata Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Metachandidae
Metachanda crypsitricha Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Metachandidae
Metachanda glaciata Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Metachandidae
Metachanda hydraula Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
54
R
Lepidoptera
Metachandidae
Metachanda noctivaga Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Metachandidae
Metachanda plumbaginella Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Momphidae
Ascalenia isotacta (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Momphidae
Cosmopteryx flavofasciata Wollaston, 1879
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Momphidae
Cosmopteryx mimetis Meyrick, 1897
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Momphidae
Lymnaecia superharpalea Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Momphidae
Stagmatophora acris Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Momphidae
Stagmatophora hieroglypta Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Acontia zelleri (Wallengren, 1856) Agrotis longidentifera (Hampson, 1903) microtica (Hampson, 1908)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Bocana sp.
end,?
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Celama tarzanae Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Gesonia pansalis (Walker, 1858)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Maceda mansueta Walker, 1857
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Porphyrinia ragusanoides Berio, 1954
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Rhesala moestalis (Walker, 1865)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Noctuidae
Spodoptera cilium (Guenée, 1852)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Nymphalidae
Acraea ranavalona Boisduval, 1833
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Nymphalidae
Acraea terpsicore (Linnaeus, 1758) legrandi Carcasson, 1964
end
Lepidoptera
Nymphalidae
Euploea mitra Moore, 1857
end
Lepidoptera
Nymphalidae
Phalanta philiberti (Joannis, 1893)
end
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Anachastis digitata Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Bigotianella menaiella Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Bigotianella simpsonella Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Bigotianella tournefortiaecolella Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Chanystis syrtopa Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Cophomantella cubiculata (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Pachnistis fulvocapitella Legrand, 1965
end
R
Lepidoptera
Oecophoridae
Stathmopoda glyphanobola Diakonoff, 1983
end
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Achyra massalis (Walker, 1859)
ind
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
55
EN
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Ancylosis niveicostella Ragonot, 1893
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Cadarena pudoraria (Fabricius, 1781)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Cnaphalocrocis trapezalis Guenée, 1854
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Ematheudes nigropunctata (Legrand, 1965)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Eurrhyparodes tricoloralis (Zeller, 1852)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Glaucocharis muscela (Fryer, 1912)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Haritalodes derogata (Fabricius, 1775)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Herpetogramma licarsisalis Walker, 1859
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Herpetogramma phaeopteralis (Guenée, 1854)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Lamprosema charesalis (Walker, 1859)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Lamprosema delhommealis (Legrand, 1965)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Mimudea ablactalis (Walker, 1859)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Noorda blitealis Walker, 1859
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Piletocera basalis (Walker, 1865)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Pleuroptyia sabinusalis Walker, 1859
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Ptyobathra irregularis (Legrand, 1965)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Pycnarmon diaphana (Cramer, 1782)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Pyralis manihotalis Guenée, 1854
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Sphingidae
Stemorrhages sericea (Drury, 1770) Bataconema coquerelii (Bosiduval, 1875) aldabrensis Aurvillius, 1909
end
R
Lepidoptera
Sphingidae
Cephonodes tamsi Griveaud, 1960 ‘
end
R
Lepidoptera
Sphingidae
Macroglossum alluaudi Joannis, 1893
end
R
Lepidoptera
Sphingidae
Nephele leighi Joicey & Talbot, 1921
end
R
Lepidoptera
Sphingidae
Temnora fumosa (Walker, 1856) pekoveri (Walker, 1877)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Afrocelestis lochaea (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis crobylora (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis cyanodesma (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis ensifera (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis fricata (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis ichnora (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
56
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis lactiflua (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis nephalia (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis polystrigella (Legrand, 1965)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis rhothiaula (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis rorida (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Amphixystis roseostrigella (Legrand, 1965)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Crypsithyrodes concolorella (Walker, 1863)
ind,?
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Erechthias calypta Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Erechthias methodica (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Erechthias molynta (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Erechthias polyplaga (Legrand, 1965)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Erechthias trichodora (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Opogona florea (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Opogona harpalea Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Opogona heliogramma (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Tinea coronata Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tineidae
Tinea milichopa Meyrick, 1911
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tortricidae
Cryptophlebia caeca Diakonoff, 1969
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tortricidae
Cryptophlebia chaomorpha (Meyrick, 1929)
ind
R
Lepidoptera
Tortricidae
Olothreutes conchopleura (Meyrick, 1911)
end
R
Lepidoptera
Tortricidae
Olothreutes hygrantis Meyrick, 1911
end
Mollusca
Acavidae
Stylodonta studeriana (Férussac, 1821)
end
EN
C
Mollusca
Acavidae
Stylodonta unidentata (Holten, 1802)
end
VU
F
Mollusca
Bulinidae
Bulinus bavayi (Dautzenberg, 1894)
ind
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) curiosae Gerlach, 2003
end
EX
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) fregatensis Van Mol & Coppois, 1980
end
EN
F
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) kantilali Van Mol & Coppois, 1980
end
EN
O
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) ladiguensis Gerlach, 2003
end
EX
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) ornatus (Dufo, 1840)
end
EN
F
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) oxoniensis Gerlach, 1994
end
CR
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
57
R
C
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
end
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) praslinus Gerlach, 1990 Pachnodus (Nesiocerastus) silhouettanus Van Mol & Coppois, 1980
VU
F
Mollusca Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Pachndous) niger (Dufo, 1840)
end
EN
F
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Pachnodus) becketti Gerlach, 1994
end
EN
O
Pachnodus (Pachnodus) lionetti Van Mol & Coppois, 1980
end
VU
O
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Pachnodus) niger x velutinus Gerlach, 1994
end
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Pachnodus (Pachnodus) velutinus (Pfeiffer, 1841)
end
EX
Mollusca
Cerastuidae
Rhachistia aldabrae (Martens, 1898)
end
EX
Mollusca
Chronidae
Kaliella aldabrana Gerlach, 2009
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Chronidae
Nesokaliella intermedia Gerlach, 2001
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Chronidae
Nesokaliella minuta Gerlach, 1998
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Chronidae
Nesokaliella subturritula (G. & H. Nevill, 1878)
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Cyclophoridae
Cyathopoma blandfordi Adams, 1868
end
Mollusca
Cyclophoridae
Cyathopoma picardense Gerlach, 2006
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Helicarionidae
Dupontia levensonia Gerlach, 2003
end
CR
R
Mollusca
Helicarionidae
Pilula mahensiana (Martens, 1898)
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Helicinidae
Pleuropoma theobaldiana (Nevill & Nevill, 1878)
end
Mollusca
Hydrobiidae
Moominia willii Gerlach, 2003
end
Mollusca
Neritidae
Neritilia consimilis (Martens, 1879)
ind
C
Mollusca
Neritidae
Neritina (Neritina) pulligera (Linnaeus, 1767)
ind
C
Mollusca
Neritidae
Neritina (Vittina) gagates Lamarck, 1822
ind
C
Mollusca
Neritidae
Septaria borbonica (Bory St. Vincent, 1803)
ind
C
Mollusca
Pomatisidae
Tropidophora gardineri Gerlach, 2006
end
Mollusca
Pomatisidae
Tropidophora pulchra (Gray, 1834)
end
Mollusca
Punctidae
Punctum seychellarum Gerlach, 1998
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Acanthennea erinacea (Martens, 1898)
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Augustula braueri (Martens, 1898)
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Careoradula perelegans (Martens, 1898)
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Conturbatia crenata Gerlach, 2001
end
CR
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Edentulina dussumieri (Dufo, 1840)
end
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
end
58
C
C
C
C EN
EN
R
R F
F
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Edentulina moreleti (Adams, 1868)
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Glabrennea gardineri (Sykes, 1909)
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Glabrennea silhouettensis (Verdcourt, 1994)
end
CR
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Glabrennea thomassetti (Sykes, 1909)
end
CR
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Gulella gwendolinae (Preston, 1910) aldabrae Bruggen, 1975
end
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Imperturbatia constans (Martens, 1898)
end
EN
F
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Imperturbatia violascens (Martens, 1898)
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Priodiscus costatus Gerlach, 1995
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Priodiscus serratus (Adams, 1868)
end
VU
R
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Priodiscus spinosus Gerlach, 1995
end
VU
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Seychellaxis souleyetianus (Petit, 1841)
end
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Silhouettia silhouettae (Martens, 1898)
end
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Stereostele nevilli (Adams, 1868)
end
F
Mollusca
Streptaxidae
Streptostele acicula (Morelet, 1877) maheensis (Connoly, 1925)
end
O
Mollusca
Succineidae
Quickia aldabrensis Patterson, 1975
end
EN
R
Mollusca
Thiaridae
Paludomus ajanensis Morelet, 1860
end
EN
R
Neuroptera
Conipterygidae
Semidalis africana Enderlein, 1906
ind
R
Neuroptera
Conipterygidae
Semidalis mascarenica Fraser, 1952
ind
R
Neuroptera
Myrmeleonidae
Creoleon mortifer (Walker, 1853)
ind
R
Neuroptera
Myrmeleonidae
Distoleon ornatus (Needham, 1913)
end
R
Odonata
Aeshnidae
Anax tristis (Hagen, 1897)
ind
O
Odonata
Aeshnidae
Gynacantha stylata Martin, 1896
end
O
Odonata
Coenagrionidae
Agriocnemis pygmaea (Rambar, 1842)
ind
O
Odonata
Coenagrionidae
Teinobasis alluaudi (Martin, 1896)
ind
Odonata
Corduliidae
ind
O
Odonata
Lestidae
Hemicordulia similis (Rambur, 1842) Lestes unicolor McLachlan, 1895 aldabrensis (Blackman & Pinhey, 1967)
end
O
Odonata
Megapodagrionidae
Allolestes maclachlani Selys, 1869
end
Odonata
Platycnemididae
Leptocnemis cyanops (Selys, 1869)
end
Oligochaeta
Acanthodrillidae
Maheina braueri (Michaelsen, 1897)
end
Opiliones
Assamiidae
Bandona palpalis Roewer, 1927
ind
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
59
R
R F
VU
VU
F
O
EN O R
Opiliones
BIANTIDAE
Biantes albimanus (Loman, 1902)
end
R
Opiliones
BIANTIDAE
Biantes minimus Rambla, 1983
end
O
Opiliones
BIANTIDAE
Biantes parvulus (Hirst, 1911)
end
R
Opiliones
PHALAGODIDAE
Hirstienus nanus (Hirst, 1913)
end
R
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Centrobunus braueri Loman, 1902
end
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Holozoster ovalis Loman, 1902
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Ibalonius bimaculatus Loman, 1902
end
F
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Ibalonius flavopictus Hirst, 1911
end
C
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Ibalonius inscriptus Loman, 1902
end
O
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Ibalonius karschi Loman, 1902
end
R
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Ibalonius lomani Hirst, 1911
end
R
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Peromona erinacea Roewer, 1949
end
R
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Sitalcicus gardineri (Hirst, 1911)
end
R
Opiliones
PODOCTIDAE
Sitalcicus incertus Rambla, 1983
end
R
Opiliones
SAMOIDAE
Benoitinus elegans Rambla, 1983
end
R
Opiliones
SAMOIDAE
Mitraceras crassipalpum Loman, 1902
end
R
Opiliones
Samoidae
Mitraceras pulchra Rambla, 1983
Opiliones
SAMOIDAE
Samoa sechellana Rambla, 1983
end
R
Opiliones
ZALMOXIOIDAE
Metazalmoxis ferruginea Roewer, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Acrididae
Pternoscirtus aldabrae (Saussure, 1899)
end
O
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Chorthippus parvulus (Saussure, 1899)
end
R
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Fryerius aphonoides (Bolivar, 1912)
end
R
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Gryllapterus tomentosus Bolivar, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Orthoxiphus nigrifrons (Bolivar, 1912)
end
R
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Phaeogryllus fuscus Bolivar, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Phalangacris alluaudi Bolivar, 1895
end
O
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Phalangacris phaloricephala Gorochov, 2006
end
O
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Phaloria insularis insularis (Bolivar, 1912)
end
R
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Scottiola salticiformis (Bolivar, 1912)
end
C
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Seychellesia longicercata Bolivar, 1912
end
C
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
R O
60
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Seychellesia nitidula Bolivar, 1912
end
F
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Seychellesia patellifera Bolivar, 1912
end
F
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Subtiloria succineus (Bolivar, 1912)
end
R
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Trigonidium bolivari (Chopard, 1968)
end
C
Orthoptera
Gryllidae
Zarceus major Bolivar, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Arachnocephalus medvedevi Gorochov, 1994
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Arachnocephalus subsulcatus Saussure, 1899
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Ectatoderus aldabrae Gorochov, 1994
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Ectatoderus nigriceps Bolivar, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Ectatoderus squamiger Bolivar, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Ornebius stenus Gorochov, 1994
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Ornebius syrticus Bolivar, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Mogoplistidae
Ornebius validus (Bolivar, 1895)
end
C
Orthoptera
Tetrigidae
Amphinotus nymphula (Bolivar, 1912)
end
O
Orthoptera
Tetrigidae
Amphinotus pupulus (Bolivar, 1912)
end
O
Orthoptera
Tetrigidae
Coptotiggia cristata Bolivar, 1912
end
R
Orthoptera
Tetrigidae
Procytettix fusiformis Bolivar, 1912
end
O
Orthoptera
Tetrigidae
Procytettix thalassanax Gunther, 1939
end
O
Orthoptera
Tettigonidae
Brachyphisis visenda (Bolivar, 1912)
end
F
Orthoptera
Tettigonidae
Odontolakis sexpunctatus (Serville, 1839)
end,?
R
Orthoptera
Tettigonidae
Plangia ovalifolia Bolivar, 1912
end
O
Palpigradi
Eukoeneniidae
Koeneniodes madecassus Rémy, 1950
ind
R
Phasmatodea
Lonchodidae
Carausius alluaudi (Bolivar, 1895)
end
C
Phasmatodea
Lonchodidae
Carausius gardineri Bolivar & Ferriere, 1912
end
O
Phasmatodea
Lonchodidae
Carausius scotti Bolivar & Ferriere, 1912
end
R
Phasmatodea
Lonchodidae
Carausius sechellensis (Bolivar, 1895)
end
O
Phasmatodea
Phyllidae
Phyllium bioculatum Gray, 1832
end
R
Phasmatodea
Platycranidae
Graffaea seychellensis Bolivar & Ferriere, 1912
end
R
Platyhelminthes
Geoplanidae
Pelmatoplana braueri (Graff, 1899)
end
Platyhelminthes
Geoplanidae
Pelmatoplana mahéensis (Graff, 1899)
end
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
61
Pseudoscorpiones GARYPINIDAE
Aldabrinus aldabrinus Chamberlin, 1930
end
R
Psocoptera
Caeciliusidae
Asiocaecilius comorensis (Enderlein, 1908)
ind
R
Psocoptera
Caeciliusidae
Caeciliius seychellensis Enderlein, 1931
end
R
Psocoptera
Caeciliusidae
Valenzuela protritus (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Caeciliusidae
Valenzuela vau (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Hemipsocidae
Anopistoscena specularifrons Enderlein, 1912
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx acutipennis Enderlein, 1931
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx annulitibia (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx argentofasciata (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx dryas (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx fastigata (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx hebes (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx hieroglyphica Enderlein, 1931
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx madagascariensis (Kolbe, 1885)
ind
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx mahénsis (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx monticola (Enderlein, 9131)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx nigra (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx psyche (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx punctulata (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Echmepteryx symmetrolepis (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Lepidopsocus fasciatus Enderlein, 1931
end
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Lepidopsocus nepticulides Enderlein, 1903
ind
R
Psocoptera
Lepidopsocidae
Lepidopsocus ochreus Enderlein, 1931
end
R
Psocoptera
Pseudocaeciliidae
Scottiella hirsuticornis Enderlein, 1931
end
R
Psocoptera
Pseudocaeciliidae
Scottiella micans Enderlein, 1931
end
R
Psocoptera
Psocidae
Ptycta laevidorsum (Enderlein, 1931)
end
R
Psocoptera
Psoquillidae
Eosilla denervosa (Enderlein, 1912)
ind
R
Psocoptera
Psyllipsocidae
Psocathropos pilipennis (Enderlein)
ind
R
Pthiraptera
Menopodidae
end
R
Pthiraptera
Menopodidae
Colpocephalum abbotti Price, 1976 Dennyus carljonesi Clayton, Price & Page, 1996. fosteri Clayton, Price & Page, 1996
end
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
62
Pthiraptera
Philopteridae
Ardeicola freemani Tandan, 1976
end
R
Schizomida
HUBBARDIIDAE
Anepsiozomus sobrinus Harvey, 2001
end
F
Schizomida
HUBBARDIIDAE
Apozomus gerlachi Harvey, 2001
end
F
Schizomida
HUBBARDIIDAE
Bamazomus aviculus Harvey, 2001
end
F
Schizomida
HUBBARDIIDAE
Mahezomus apicoporus Harvey, 2001
end
R
Scorpiones
BUTHIDAE
Lychas braueri (Kraepelin, 1896)
end
R
Scorpiones
LIOCHELIDAE
Chiromachus ochropus (C.L. Koch, 1837)
ind
F
Trichoptera
Atriplectidae
Hughscottiella auricapilla Ulmer, 1910
end
C
Trichoptera
Ecnomidae
Ecnomus insularis Ulmer, 1910
end
C
Trichoptera
Ecnomidae
Ecnomus maheensis Malicky, 1993
end
O
Trichoptera
Helicopsychidae
Helicopsyche kantilali Marlier & Malicky, 1979
end
C
Trichoptera
Helicopsychidae
Helicopsyche palpalis (Ulmer, 1910)
end
C
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
Hydromanicus seychellensis Ulmer, 1910
end
C
Trichoptera
Hydroptilidae
Oxyethira sechellensis Malicky, 1993
end
O
Trichoptera
Leptoceridae
Oecetis michaeli Malicky, 1999
end
R
Trichoptera
Odontoceridae
Leptodermatopteryx tenuis Ulmer, 1910
end
C
Trichoptera
Polycentropodidae
Cyrnodes scotti Ulmer, 1910
end
O
Trichoptera
Sericostomatidae
Seselpsyche matyoti Malicky, 1993
end
O
Trichoptera
Sericostomatidae
Seselpsyche terpsichore Malicky, 2008
end
O
Zygentoma
Lepismatidae
Acrotelsella elongata Carpenter, 1916
end
O
Zygentoma
Lepismatidae
Acrotelsella scotti Carpenter, 1916
end
O
Zygentoma
Nicoletidae
Lepidospora braueri Escherich, 1905
end
O
VII.5 Vascular
plants (Bruno Senterre): 114 entries
CLASS
FAMILY
SPECIES
Dicotyledon
Acanthaceae
Justicia gardineri Turrill
end,?
EX
R
Dicotyledon
Acanthaceae
Pseuderanthemum tunicatum (Afzel.) Milne-Redh.
ind,?
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Amaranthaceae
Lagrezia madagascariensis (Poir.) Moq.
exo,?
CR
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
Vernacular names
63
Origin IUCN Rarity
Dicotyledon
Anacardiaceae
Campnosperma seychellarum March
Dicotyledon
Apocynaceae
Carissa edulis (Forssk.) Vahl var. sechellensis (Baker) Pichon
bois de montagne, capucin blanc?, colophante? bois sandal, sandal, Bois l'encens (Friedmann 1994: 422)
Dicotyledon
Apocynaceae
Cerbera venenifera (Poir.) Steud.
tanghin, ordeal plant
ind,?
Dicotyledon
Araliaceae
Gastonia crassa (Hemsl.) F.Friedmann
Bois banane
end
VU
F
Dicotyledon
Araliaceae
Gastonia lionnetii F.Friedmann
Bois banane
end
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Araliaceae
Gastonia sechellarum (Baker) Harms var. contracta F.Friedmann
end
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Araliaceae
Gastonia sechellarum (Baker) Harms var. curiosae F.Friedmann
end
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Araliaceae
Gastonia sechellarum (Baker) Harms var. sechellarum
end
VU
O
Dicotyledon
Araliaceae
Schefflera procumbens (Hemsl.) F.Friedmann
end
VU
R
Dicotyledon
Asclepiadaceae
Secamone schimperiana (Hemsl.) Klack.
end
EN
R
Dicotyledon
Asclepiadaceae
Tylophora coriaceae Marais
ind
VU
R
Dicotyledon
Asclepiadaceae
Tylophora indica (Burm.f.) Merr.
ipec sauvage
ind,?
Dicotyledon
Asteraceae
Vernonia sechellensis Baker
Ayapana sauvage
end
EX
R
Dicotyledon
Balsaminaceae
Impatiens gordonii Horne ex Baker
balsamine sauvage
end
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Bignoniaceae
Colea seychellarum Seem.
bilimbi marron
end
EN
O
Dicotyledon
Boraginaceae
Tournefortia puberula Baker
ind
VU
R
Dicotyledon
Cucurbitaceae
Peponium sublitorale C.Jeffrey & J.S.Page
end
Dicotyledon
Cucurbitaceae
Peponium vogelii (Hook.f.) Engl.
ind
CR
Dicotyledon
Dilleniaceae
Dillenia ferruginea (Baill.) Gilg
bois rouge
end
VU
Dicotyledon
Dipterocarpaceae
Vateriopsis seychellarum Heim
Bwa-d-fer; Bois de fer
end
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Escalloniaceae
Brexia madagascariensis Thouars
bois cateau
ind
VU
O
Dicotyledon
Euphorbiaceae
Drypetes riseleyi Airy Shaw
bois mare petite feuille
end
CR
O
Dicotyledon
Euphorbiaceae
Excoecaria benthamiana Hemsley
bois charlot, bois jasmin rouge
end
VU
O
Dicotyledon
Euphorbiaceae
Lautembergia neraudiana (Baillon) Coode
ind
EX
R
Dicotyledon
Fabaceae
Erythrina variegata L
Dicotyledon
Flacourtiaceae
Ludia mauritiana J.F.Gmel. var. sechellensis F.Friedmann
end
VU
Dicotyledon
Icacinaceae
Grisollea thomassetii Hemsl.
end
CR
O
Dicotyledon
Lamiaceae
Achyrospermum sechellarum Baker
end
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Leeaceae
Leea guineensis G.Don
exo,?
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
Bois papaye, Bois banane
Mourouc
64
end
CR
F
end
CR
R R
R
R
ind
R
R
Bakerella clavata (Desrouss.) S.Balle subsp. sechellensis (Baker) S.Balle
Bois marmaille
end
Medusagynaceae
Medusagyne oppositifolia Baker
bois medus, jellyfish tree
end
CR
R
Mimosaceae
Acacia pennata (L.) Willd.
ind
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Molluginaceae
Glinus oppositifolius (L.) Aug. DC.
ind,?
O
Dicotyledon
Moraceae
Ficus bojeri Baker
ind
O
Dicotyledon
Moraceae
Ficus rubra Vahl
ind
O
Dicotyledon
Moraceae
Trilepisium madagascariense DC.
ind
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Myrsinaceae
Rapanea seychellarum Mez
end
CR
R
Dicotyledon
Nepenthaceae
Nepenthes pervillei Bl.
liane pot a eau, pitcher plant
end
VU
O
Dicotyledon
Nyctaginaceae
Pisonia sechellarum Friedm.
Mapou de gran bwa
end
CR
Dicotyledon
Olacaceae
ind,?
Dicotyledon
Oleaceae
Ximenia americana L. Jasminum fluminense Vell. subsp. mauritianum (Bojer ex DC.) Turrill
Dicotyledon
Onagraceae
Ludwigia jussiaeoides Desr.
ind,?
EX
R
Dicotyledon
Passifloraceae
Adenia gummifera (Harv.) Harms
lalyann marya, liane Maria, liane Blanc
ind
EN
R
Dicotyledon
Piperaceae
Piper silhouettanum Gerlach
wild pepper'Friedmann
R
Dicotyledon
Pittosporaceae
Pittosporum senacia Putt. subsp. wrightii (Hemsl.) Cufod.
Dicotyledon
Rhamnaceae
Smythea lanceata (Tul.) Summerhayes
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Amaracarpus pubescens Bl. subsp. sechellarum F.Friedmann
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Canthium carinatum (Baker) Summerh.
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Canthium sechellense Summerh.
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Craterispermum microdon Baker
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Glionnetia sericea (Baker) Tirv.
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Ixora pudica Baker
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Psathura sechellarum Baker
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Psychotria pervillei Baker
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Psychotria silhouettae F.Friedmann
Dicotyledon
Loranthaceae
Dicotyledon Dicotyledon
Lafouche
EX
bois dur blanc bois doux ixora blanc bois couleuvre
R
end
CR
end
VU
ind
EX
R
end
CR
R
end
VU
end
EN
end
EN
O
EN
O
end
VU
F
end
CR
R
end
VU
end
CR
R
end
CR
O
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Rothmannia annae (Wright)Keay
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Tarenna sechellensis (Baker) Summerh.
bois dur blanc, bois dur bleu
end
VU
Dicotyledon
Rubiaceae
Timonius sechellensis Summerh.
bois cassant de montagne, bois cassant
end
VU
65
R
end
bois citron, bois calabash, wrights gardenia
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
R R
ind,?
Bwa senti (Carlström)
R
grand bois Dicotyledon
Sapindaceae
Allophyllus sechellensis Summerh.
Bwa kafoul trwa fey, Bois cafoul 3 feuilles end
VU
Dicotyledon
Sapotaceae
Northea hornei (M.M.Hartog) Pierre
Kapisen, Capucin
end
VU
Dicotyledon
Simaroubaceae
Soulamea terminalioides Baker
Colophante
end
VU
O
Dicotyledon
Viscaceae
Korthalsella opuntia (Thunb.)Merr.
ind
EX
R
Dicotyledon
Viscaceae
Viscum triflorum DC.
Bois marmaille
ind
EN
R
Monocotyledon
Arecaceae
Lodoicea maldivica (Gmel.)Pers.
coco de mer, double coconut
end
VU
O
Monocotyledon
Arecaceae
Nephrosperma vanhoutteanum (H.Wendl. ex van-Houtt.) Balf.f.
latanier millepatte
end
VU
Monocotyledon
Arecaceae
Roscheria melanochaetes (H.Wendl.) H.Wendl. ex Balf.f.
latanier hauban
end
VU
Monocotyledon
Arecaceae
Verschaffeltia splendida H.Wendl.
latanier latte, latte
end
VU
Monocotyledon
Hypoxidaceae
Hypoxidia maheensis F.Friedmann
end
EN
R
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Agrostophyllum occidentale Schltr.
end
VU
F
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Agrostophyllum seychellarum Rolfe
end
R
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Angraecum maheensis Schlechter
end
R
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Calanthe triplicata (Willem.) Ames
ind
CR
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Disperis tripetaloides (Thouars) Lindl.
ind
VU
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Eulophidium seychellarum (Rolfe ex Summerh.) Summerh.
end,?
EX
R
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Hederorkis seychellensis Bosser
end
EN
O
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Oeoniella polystachys Schlechter
ind
CR
R
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Phaius tetragonus (Thouars) Reichb.f.
ind
VU
O
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Platylepis occulta (Thouars) Rchb.f.
ind
VU
R
Monocotyledon
Orchidaceae
Platylepis sechellarum S.Moore
end
EN
O
Monocotyledon
Pandanaceae
Pandanus balfourii Martelli
end
VU
Monocotyledon
Pandanaceae
Pandanus hornei Balf.f.
end
VU
Monocotyledon
Poaceae
Garnotia sechellensis Hubb. & Summerhayes
end
EN
Monocotyledon
Potamogetonaceae
Potamogeton richardi Solms
ind
Monocotyledon
Potamogetonaceae
Potamogeton thunbergii Chern. & Schltr.
ind
Monocotyledon
Triuridaceae
Seychellaria thomassetii Hemsl.
end
Pteridophyta
Aspleniaceae
Asplenium caudatum Forst. var. minor C.Chr.
end
R
Pteridophyta
Cyatheaceae
Cyathea sechellarum Mett.
end
O
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
vacoa de riviere, balfour's pandanus
66
O
R R R
NT
R
Pteridophyta
Dennstaedtiaceae
Sphenomeris chusana (L.) Cop.
ind
Pteridophyta
Dryopteridaceae
Tectaria pleiotoma (Baker) C.Chr.
end
R
Pteridophyta
Grammitidaceae
Ctenopteris elastica (Bory ex Willd.) Copel.
ind
O
Pteridophyta
Grammitidaceae
Grammitis pervillei (Mett. ex Kuhn) Tardieu
ind
O
Pteridophyta
Grammitidaceae
Grammitis sp.1
end
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Crepidomanes sp.1 aff. mannii
end
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Didymoglossum sp.1 aff. motleyi
end
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Hymenophyllum polyanthos (Sw.) Sw. var. A
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Hymenophyllym hirsutum (L.) Sw.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Trichomanes bipunctatum Poir.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Trichomanes digitatum Sw.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Trichomanes fulgens C.Chr.
end
R
Pteridophyta
Hymenophyllaceae
Trichomanes tamarisciforme Jacq.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Lomariopsidaceae
Lomariopsis pervillei (Mett.) Kuhn
end
R
Pteridophyta
Marattiaceae
Angiopteris sp.1
end
R
Pteridophyta
Marattiaceae
Ptisana fraxinea Sm.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Oleandraceae
Nephrolepis acutifolia (Desv.) Christ
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Oleandraceae
Nephrolepis undulata (Afzel. ex Sw.) J.Sm.
ind
O
Pteridophyta
Polypodiaceae
Drymoglossum niphoboloides (Luerss.) Bak.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Pteridaceae
Afropteris barklyae (Baker) Alston
end
R
Pteridophyta
Selaginellaceae
Selaginella sechellarum Baker
end,?
R
Pteridophyta
Vittariaceae
Antrophyum immersum (Bory ex Willd.) Mett.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Vittariaceae
Antrophyum malgassicum C.Chr.
ind
R
Pteridophyta
Vittariaceae
Haplopteris zosterifolia (Willd.) E.H.Crane
ind
R
Senterre et al. (2011) Seychelles key biodiversity areas - Output 1
67
R