Summary of conservation gap analysis
North American Fruit and Nut Tree Crop Wild Relatives Working Group
February 2023
Emily Beckman Bruns, Colin Khoury, Nan McCarry, Abby Meyer, Ray Mims, and Emily Warschefsky
Threat status
| Taxon | IUCNRedListCategory | NatureServeConservationRank |
|---|---|---|
| Prunus fasciculata | NE (Not Evaluated) | G5 (Secure) |
Learn more about the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and NatureServe
Summary of occurrences
| Taxon | TotalRecords | TotalCoords | TotalExsituRecords | TotalExsituCoords | TotalRefRecords | TotalRefCoords |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prunus fasciculata | 3815 | 1038 | 28 | 11 | 3787 | 1027 |
TotalRecords: Number of occurrences associated with the taxon; gathered from GBIF, iDigBio, IUCN Red List, SEINet, BIEN, USDA FIA, and wild collection locations of ex situ material.
TotalCoords: Number of occurrences with valid latitude and longitude.
TotalExsituRecords: Number of ex situ conservation (genebank and botanical garden) accessions.
TotalExsituCoords: Number of ex situ conservation accessions with valid latitude and longitude.
TotalRefRecords: Number of reference (e.g. herbarium voucher and observation) occurrences.
TotalRefCoords: Number of reference occurrences with valid latitude and longitude (used for spatial analyses).
You can also download reference occurrences for all target taxa in one file here.
Ex situ conservation gap analysis
The table below shows the ex situ conservation gap analysis summary results. The Sampling Representativeness Score (SRS) ex situ process assesses the completeness of ex situ conservation collections, calculating the ratio of germplasm accessions (genebanks and botanical gardens) available in ex situ repositories to reference records for each taxon, making use of all compiled records, regardless of whether they include coordinates, with an ideal (i.e., comprehensive) conservation ratio of 1:1. The Geographical Representativeness Score (GRS) ex situ process provides a geographic measurement of the proportion of a taxon’s range that can be considered to be conserved in ex situ repositories. The Ecological Representativeness Score (ERS) ex situ process provides an ecological measurement of the proportion of a taxon’s range that can be considered to be conserved in ex situ repositories. All scores are bound between 0 and 100, with 0 representing an extremely poor state of conservation, and 100 representing comprehensive protection. The summary ex situ conservation score is called the Final Conservation Score (FCS) ex situ and is a mean of the three ex situ conservation scores. The FCS is used to categorize taxa into an FCS_class ex situ, with urgent priority for further conservation action assigned when FCS < 25, high priority where 25 ≤ FCS < 50, medium priority where 50 ≤ FCS < 75, and low priority for taxa whose FCS ≥75.
| Taxon | SRS ex situ | GRS ex situ | ERS ex situ | FCS ex situ | FCS_class ex situ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prunus fasciculata | 0.74 | 18.21 | 55.56 | 24.84 | Urgent Priority |
Table of ex situ conservation collections reporting germplasm
ExSituCollection: Abbreviated name of ex situ conservation collection holding the germplasm. Names with numbers (e.g. GBR004) are institution codes for genebanks.
ProvenanceType: The original source of the plant material, categorized as Horticultural, Wild (includes cultivated-from-wild), or Unknown.
WildLocationMapped: Whether the wild source location has a valid latitude and longitude; if so, it is included in the spatial analyses and maps below.
AccessionNumber: Institution-specific unique identifier.
NumberOfIndividuals: Number of living or viable individuals representing an accession.
CollectionYear: Year of original wild collection.
Contact gardensearch@bgci.org to request additional ex situ accessions data fields.
Map of ex situ geographical representativeness (GRS ex situ)
Taxon’s modeled distribution (potential distribution), occurrence points surrounded by 50km buffers (estimated distribution), and germplasm collection points surrounded by 50km buffers (potential distribution conserved ex situ). Use the layers icon on the left side of the map to change the basemap and toggle layers on/off.
Map of ex situ ecological representativeness (ERS ex situ)
Taxon’s modeled potential distribution, with ecoregions highlighted where no ex situ conservation germplasm has been collected. Toggle on the occurrence point layer using the layers icon on the left side of the map.
ECO_ID_U: Unique ID value representing the ecoregion on the map.
ECO_NAME: The name of the ecoregion.
Conserved Ex Situ: Whether germplasm has been collected within this ecoregion for ex situ conservation.
WWF_MHTNAM: Major habitat type; a more generalized category of ecoregion.
SOURCEDATA: The citation of the ecoregion definition.
View map of all TNC global ecoregions here
In situ conservation gap analysis
The table below shows the in situ conservation gap analysis summary results. The Sampling Representativeness Score (SRS) in situ reports the proportion of occurrences which fall within protected areas (WDPA 2019). The Geographical Representativeness Score (GRS) in situ process provides a geographic measurement of the proportion of a taxon’s range that can be considered to be conserved in protected areas. The Ecological Representativeness Score (ERS) in situ process provides an ecological measurement of the proportion of a taxon’s range that can be considered to be conserved in protected areas. All scores are bound between 0 and 100, with 0 representing an extremely poor state of conservation, and 100 representing comprehensive protection. The summary in situ conservation score is called the Final Conservation Score (FCS) in situ and is a mean of the three in situ conservation scores. The FCS is used to categorize taxa into an FCS_class in situ, with urgent priority for further conservation action assigned when FCS < 25, high priority where 25 ≤ FCS < 50, medium priority where 50 ≤ FCS < 75, and low priority for taxa whose FCS ≥75.
| Taxon | SRS in situ | GRS in situ | ERS in situ | FCS in situ | FCS_class in situ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prunus fasciculata | 49.33 | 35.46 | 100 | 61.59 | Medium Priority |
Map of in situ sampling representativeness (SRS in situ)
Taxon occurrences that are outside protected areas, with values summarized by number of occurrences per cell. Toggle on the occurrence point layer using the layers icon on the left side of the map.
Map of in situ geographical representativeness (GRS in situ)
Taxon’s modeled potential distribution, with distribution occurring within existing protected areas highlighted. Toggle on the occurrence point layer using the layers icon on the left side of the map.
Map of in situ ecological representativeness (ERS in situ)
Taxon’s modeled potential distribution, with ecoregions highlighted where no protected areas are present. Toggle on the occurrence point layer using the layers icon on the left side of the map.
## All ecoregions are conserved in situ.ECO_ID_U: Unique ID value representing the ecoregion on the map.
ECO_NAME: The name of the ecoregion.
Conserved In Situ: Whether this ecoregion occurs within protected areas.
WWF_MHTNAM: Major habitat type; a more generalized category of ecoregion.
SOURCEDATA: The citation of the ecoregion definition.
View map of all TNC global ecoregions here.
Combined conservation gap analysis
This table shows the combined ex situ and in situ conservation gap analysis metrics. The Combined Final Conservation Score (FCS combined) is the average of the FCS ex situ and FCS in situ. The conservation status of the taxon is categorized with regard to the ex situ and in situ conservation scores, and the combined score, with urgent priority for further conservation action assigned when FCS < 25, high priority where 25 ≤ FCS < 50, medium priority where 50 ≤ FCS < 75, and low priority for taxa whose FCS ≥75.
| Taxon | FCS ex situ | FCS_class ex situ | FCS in situ | FCS_class in situ | FCS combined | FCS_class combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prunus fasciculata | 24.84 | Urgent Priority | 61.59 | Medium Priority | 43.22 | High Priority |
A summary figure of all conservation scores for our 95 target taxa can be viewed here and used to prioritize among taxa.
Additional resources – including data sources, citations, and methods information – can be found here.
Recommended citation: Bruns, E.B., Khoury, C.K., McCarry, N., Meyer, A., Mims, R., Warschefsky E., and the North American Fruit and Nut Tree Crop Wild Relatives Working Group. (2023). Distributions and conservation status of North American fruit and nut tree crop wild relatives. Summary of conservation gap analysis for [TAXON NAME]. [URL].
This work was funded by the United States Botanic Garden. Emily Beckman Bruns was also supported by NSF ABI grant #1759759. Additional thanks to San Diego Botanic Garden, Botanic Gardens Conservation International - US, The Morton Arboretum, and Missouri Botanical Garden for providing organizational support.
