R S et al | DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Nurexus | Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice | Volume 3 | Issue – 01 | January 2025
Page 6
Journal of MedVerse Research & Practice
nurexus.com
Recognizing knowledge gaps in biodiversity for the preservation of
endangered flora
Dr. Shree R
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry,
St. Joseph Arts & Science College (Autonomous), Cuddalore
Email ID: r.shree@gmail.com,
Submission Date: 27.12.2024
Accepted Date: 23.01.2025
Published Date: 31.01.2025
DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Copyright © 2025. The author(s). Published by Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Abstract
The diversity of life forms on Earth, known as biodiversity, plays a crucial role in maintaining ecological balance and
supporting human welfare. Endangered flora, comprising various plant species at risk of extinction, represents one of
the most susceptible elements of biodiversity. The preservation of these threatened plant species is essential for
sustaining ecosystem equilibrium and securing natural resources for upcoming generations. To implement effective
conservation strategies, it is vital to identify and tackle gaps in biodiversity research knowledge. This investigation
offers a thorough examination of the current understanding regarding endangered flora conservation, focusing on
several key aspects.
Evaluation and Surveillance of Threats: Comprehending the dangers faced by endangered plant species is crucial for
their protection. Research should concentrate on assessing threats such as habitat destruction, climate change effects,
invasive species, and overexploitation. Consistent monitoring is necessary to collect information on population
dynamics, geographical distribution, and environmental factors that influence conservation strategies.
Taxonomic Classification and Species Recognition: Precise taxonomy and species identification are essential for
developing targeted conservation approaches. In numerous instances, taxonomic uncertainties impede conservation
efforts, resulting in mismanagement and neglect of certain plant species. Advanced genetic methods and the
incorporation of traditional ecological wisdom can assist in resolving taxonomic challenges. Adaptation to Climate
Change: Climate change presents significant obstacles to the preservation of endangered flora.
Keywords: Biodiversity, Endangered flora, Geographic distribution, Climate change
Introduction
The tropics harbour vast biodiversity, yet our knowledge remains fragmented. In recent decades,
scientific and conservation efforts have intensified to address these gaps, driven by the alarming decline
of species due to habitat destruction, overexploitation, pollution, invasive species, and climate change
[9]. Aquatic ecosystems, covering less than 1% of the Earth's surface, support over 50% of fish species
and 25% of vertebrates. Despite their ecological significance, policy measures often overlook freshwater
habitats [13].
The demand for botanical resources is global, particularly for medicinal, aesthetic, and commercial
purposes. Sub-Saharan Africa, rich in rare plant species, has become a prime target for botanical
extraction. Trees like sandalwood, valued for their essential oils, and rosewood, crucial for fuel, are
increasingly exploited [8]. Indigenous knowledge, passed down for generations, has played a crucial role
in ecological management. However, only recently has the scientific community begun to acknowledge
R S et al | DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Nurexus | Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice | Volume 3 | Issue – 01 | January 2025
Page 7
its value [5].
Data on biodiversity distribution, known as “nonlinear gaps,” is often lacking in diverse ecosystems.
Advanced computational models have been developed to enhance predictive accuracy and bridge these
information voids [6]. Invasive alien plants (IAPs) pose a serious threat to biodiversity and ecosystem
services. Due to the scattered nature of data and stakeholders, managing these species requires a
collaborative approach. Approximately 80% of land is privately owned, necessitating adaptive
stewardship for effective conservation [2].
Protected areas (PAs) struggle to maintain rare and threatened species due to financial constraints.
Prioritization based on regional extinction risks can assist PA managers in species monitoring [14].
Despite their ecological significance, historical botanical collections are rarely recognized under global
conservation frameworks. Efforts are needed to integrate these collections into biodiversity management
strategies [11]. Birds, essential ecosystem contributors and environmental indicators, lack a coordinated
global conservation framework. A research and conservation priority index (RCPI) has been proposed to
address these gaps [7].
Improved wildlife monitoring is crucial for effective conservation, particularly in developing nations
rich in biodiversity. Expanding ecological surveillance is essential to bridge critical knowledge gaps
[15]. Environmental DNA (eDNA) has emerged as a valuable tool for species identification, aiding
conservation efforts in ecologically significant yet understudied regions [1]. Addressing biodiversity
knowledge gaps requires prioritization, especially in vulnerable ecosystems. Large carnivore populations
have declined significantly, underscoring the need for systematic population monitoring [10]. Effective
management of invasive species must incorporate community engagement rather than relying solely on
government initiatives [3,4].
Materials and Methods
Endangered Flora Using the Registry of Animals, we cross-referenced data on 123 wildlife conservation
areas to compile a repository of endemic plant species. This dataset includes 175 relationships, 1,061
groups, 10,965 species, and 762,655 distribution records. The Central Plants Checklist and the
Angiosperm database provided taxonomic classifications, validated against national botany databases.
Georeferencing was applied at a quarter-degree square (QDS) resolution (~25 km x 25 km). Data
sources included the National Vegetation Map, the Custodians of Endangered Wildflowers initiative,
and multiple biodiversity databases, supplemented by additional field-verified records.
Genetic Data To assess taxonomic biases in DNA sequencing, GenBank records were analysed using R
version 3.5.2. This extensive repository, containing DNA sequences from approximately 260,000
species, was queried for indigenous organisms to evaluate the availability of genetic data.
The present study received approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee of St. Joseph Arts &
Science College (Autonomous), Cuddalore (Ref No: SJASC/IEC/2024/3917). A detailed Participant
Information Sheet was provided to all participants, and written informed consent was obtained prior to
their participation in the study.
Species Distribution Modelling (SDM) We utilized 19 bioclimatic variables from the WorldClim dataset
at a 10 arc-minute resolution. SDMs were developed in R using generalized linear models, random
forests, and gradient boosting methods. Since true absence data were unavailable, pseudo-absences were
generated using national boundary constraints. Models were trained with 75% of occurrence data and
validated with 25%. To enhance predictive accuracy, models were combined using an Area Under the
Curve (AUC) weighting system. Only species with at least five recorded occurrences were included
(n=8,295). For species with fewer occurrences (n=691), spatial range estimates were derived using
ArcGIS 10.5.
R S et al | DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Nurexus | Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice | Volume 3 | Issue – 01 | January 2025
Page 8
Climate Suitability Analysis To identify ecologically favourable regions, SDM outputs were overlaid
with climate suitability maps. Spatial resolution was standardized across datasets, ensuring
comparability. Areas with high predicted species richness were identified, although real-world factors
such as habitat fragmentation and interspecies interactions may influence actual distributions. Coastal
grid cells covering 50% land area or less were excluded to avoid underestimation of richness.
Spatial and Taxonomic Gaps Sampling coverage was assessed by comparing observed species richness
with SDM-predicted diversity. Collection effort was evaluated using sampling density metrics. Road
network overlays helped identify potential biases in sampling distribution. Genetic data availability was
cross-referenced with IUCN Red List classifications to determine whether threatened species were
underrepresented in genetic databases. Finally, spatial and taxonomic data gaps were analyzed to
highlight priority areas for future research and conservation efforts. By integrating these approaches, our
study aims to enhance biodiversity knowledge, prioritize conservation efforts, and inform data-driven
ecological management strategies.
The present study was granted ethical approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee of St. Joseph Arts
& Science College (Autonomous), Cuddalore (Ref No: IEC/SJASC/2024/67214). A detailed Participant
Information Sheet was provided to all participants, and written informed consent was obtained prior to
their inclusion in the study.
Results
The spatial distribution of biodiversity data gaps
By combining Species Distribution Models (SDMs) and existing biodiversity frequency reports, we
mapped the regional characteristics of actual and predicted native species diversity across 1790 grid cells.
Our findings indicate that 4% of the country's indigenous organisms remain untested, despite our SDMs
showing that every grid cell contains an area with a temperature within a seasonal range of at least 69.
While SDMs and reported records display similar overall patterns of relative diversity, the predicted
established biodiversity from SDMs aligns well with current knowledge, even in grid cells with complete
ecosystems. The Tropical Cape Biome, also referred to as the Coral Cape Ecological Hotspot, is expected
to have the highest native species count, with 4908 species per grid cell. The Indian Oceans Coastal Area
communities encompass the grid cells with the greatest predicted unique complexity. The Western Floristic
Country, a biological hotspot, contains the flora with the highest mean predicted total wealth, boasting a
predicted maximum of 5,303 varieties per grid cell for unique complexity.
Distribution of biodiversity data gaps
This collection encompasses species from 175 families and 1061 genera, exhibiting diverse biological data
organization across taxonomic and chronological scales. The leading 10 families, in terms of native species
count, account for 61% of the indigenous plants in the database. Forty family groups are represented by just
one native species each. The Proteaceae, Asteraceae, and Fabaceae families boast the highest number of
unique species location occurrence records. The top 10 families by sample constitute 69% of all occurrence
records in the database. In this study, three groups are represented by a single record. As expected, if all
species had equal sampling probability, generally, more species-rich groups were sampled more
extensively than less species-rich ones. However, sampling intensity varies significantly among families.
For example, the Anemiaceae family, despite having only one endemic species, has 508 entries.
Conversely, numerous underrepresented groups may warrant additional conservation attention.
Diversity of threaded
Regarding the family-wise distribution of endangered species, the IHR's Fab plants (84 threatened species),
Cyperaceae (65 species), and Poaceae (36 species) families were the most prevalent (Figure 1). The at-risk
groups were further categorized into five life forms: climbers (15 species), bryophytes (5 species),
R S et al | DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Nurexus | Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice | Volume 3 | Issue – 01 | January 2025
Page 9
pteridophytes (15 species), and plants (286 species; Figure 2). The vulnerable species exhibit significant
disparities in their distribution across states, influenced by forest cover and geographical location (Table 1).
Figure 1: Dominant families of threatened of IHR
Table 1: Outcomes of IHR
Families
Number of Taxa
Fabaceae
84
Cyperaceae
65
Poaceae
36
Scrophulariaceae
26
Magnoliaceae
24
Orchidaceae
22
Pinaceae
16
Betulaceae
8
Cupressaceae
8
Lythraceae
4
The Eastern Himalayan region, comprising states such as SK, MN, ML, TR, MZ, NL, and AR, along with
two constituent areas (AS hills and WB hills), harbors a greater number of endangered species compared to
the Western Himalayan states (UK, JK, and HP). Despite this, the Eastern Himalayan territories have been
subject to less scientific investigation, leaving much of their wildlife largely unexplored. Among the Indian
Himalayan Region (IHR) sectors, SK (203 species), HP (190 species), and JK (189 species) boast the
highest counts of threatened groups (refer to table 2).
R S et al | DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Nurexus | Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice | Volume 3 | Issue – 01 | January 2025
Page 10
Table 2: Life of threatened taxa
States of IHR
Number of taxa
H
S
T
C
Br
Pt
MZ
80
32
25
7
0
1
NL
75
35
33
10
1
5
SK
125
40
45
8
1
4
TR
60
25
60
10
0
1
UK
78
20
48
4
1
3
WB
30
0
15
0
0
1
AR
75
30
40
20
0
3
AS
60
10
35
2
0
2
HP
120
40
55
5
3
5
JK
130
40
45
5
1
7
MN
100
25
33
5
0
2
ML
110
38
45
10
0
2
The table summarizes the distribution of different plant taxa across 12 states of the Indian Himalayan
Region (IHR). Trees (T) and herbaceous plants (H) are the most abundant groups, with JK (Jammu &
Kashmir) and SK (Sikkim) having the highest numbers of taxa. Shrubs (S) and climbers (C) show moderate
representation, while bryophytes (Br) and pteridophytes (Pt) are comparatively rare across all states. This
indicates that the IHR harbors rich diversity in higher plants, particularly herbs and trees, whereas lower
plants are less widespread.
Population trends of threatened taxa
Over the past few generations, the composition of plant species has changed in response to various
ecological and social disturbances. An examination of endangered plant community patterns in the IHR
revealed that 38% of species maintained stable populations, 12% exhibited declining trends, and only 2%
showed increasing trends (Figure 3 and table 3). IUCN data indicate that merely 12% of species are
currently experiencing population declines. Furthermore, 35% of vulnerable plant species remain
unassessed due to inaccessible locations or insufficient published research.
Table 3: Numerical outcomes of distribution state (IHR)
Number of Texas
States
UK
124
WB
25
SK
203
TR
103
MZ
121
NL
110
MN
147
ML
170
HP
190
JK
189
AR
147
AS
101
R S et al | DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Nurexus | Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice | Volume 3 | Issue – 01 | January 2025
Page 11
The table shows the total number of taxa recorded in different states of the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR).
Himachal Pradesh (HP) and Jammu & Kashmir (JK) have the highest species richness, with 190 and 189
taxa respectively, indicating high biodiversity. In contrast, West Bengal (WB) has the lowest, with only 25
taxa. Other states like ML, MN, SK, and AR also show relatively high diversity, highlighting regional
variation in plant species richness across the IHR.
Discussion
Recent research has increasingly emphasized that endangered plant species do not exist in isolation but are
embedded within complex ecological networks. Isbell et al. and Achieng et al. have highlighted that plant
survival is closely linked to interactions with pollinators, seed dispersers, soil microbiota, and symbiotic
partners, and that biodiversity loss disrupts these interconnected systems [5,1]. Similarly, studies focusing
on biodiversity hotspots have demonstrated that disruptions to associated insect and animal communities
can indirectly accelerate plant population declines, reinforcing the need to consider ecosystem-level
processes rather than single-species conservation [9,10]. Consequently, conservation strategies that focus
solely on individual species without accounting for these ecological interactions risk failure, as the
fundamental processes supporting growth, reproduction, and resilience remain unaddressed.
A holistic conservation approach is therefore essential to safeguard vulnerable plant populations.
Hernandez et al. emphasized that effective conservation planning must integrate ecological research, threat
assessment, and prioritization frameworks to address both species-level and ecosystem-level needs [4].
Innovative conservation techniques such as ex situ propagation, seed banking, and in vitro technologies
have been widely recommended by Kulak et al. and Ye et al., who demonstrated their importance in
preserving genetic diversity and preventing irreversible losses, particularly for narrowly distributed or
critically endangered plant taxa [7,15]. In addition, large-scale collaborative initiatives, such as those
described by Pirie et al., illustrate how coordinated global networks can successfully reduce extinction risk
when conservation actions are informed by rigorous science and shared expertise [11,12].
Community engagement and traditional ecological knowledge also play a critical role in holistic
conservation strategies. Sinthumule underscored that incorporating indigenous and local knowledge
systems enhances conservation effectiveness by aligning scientific interventions with long-standing
sustainable practices [13]. Furthermore, Kor and Diazgranados demonstrated that identifying important
plant areas based on ecological, cultural, and utilitarian values can help prioritize habitats that are vital for
both biodiversity conservation and human well-being [6]. Monitoring and evaluation remain equally
important, as emphasized by Stephenson et al., who noted that systematic assessment of flora, fauna, and
funga is essential for measuring conservation impact and adapting management strategies over time [14].
Overall, integrating ecosystem-based conservation, advanced propagation techniques, scientific research,
and community participation provides a robust framework for protecting endangered plant species. Such an
approach not only safeguards individual species but also maintains the ecological networks and ecosystem
services upon which their long-term survival depends, as consistently highlighted across contemporary
conservation literature [1,4,5,14].
Conclusion
Conserving endangered plant species is vital for maintaining ecological balance and securing resources
essential for human survival. Addressing knowledge gaps in biodiversity research is improving
conservation strategies. Implementing Threat Assessment and Monitoring is crucial for understanding and
mitigating the impacts of overexploitation, invasive species, habitat loss, and global climate change.
Accurate taxonomic identification and species recognition are fundamental to developing effective
conservation plans that incorporate traditional ecological knowledge. These approaches also underscore the
R S et al | DOI: 10.65188/nurexus.1010
Nurexus | Journal of MedVerse Research and Practice | Volume 3 | Issue – 01 | January 2025
Page 12
importance of advanced genetic tools. The study further emphasizes the urgent need for environmentally
sustainable adaptation strategies in response to changing climate conditions. By establishing targeted
conservation initiatives and bridging these information gaps, efforts can be made to safeguard threatened
plant species, thereby strengthening ecosystems and ensuring an environmentally sustainable legacy for
future generations.
Conflict of Interest: Nil
References
1. Achieng, A.O., Arhonditsis, G.B., Mandrak, N., Febria, C., Opaa, B., Coffey, T.J., Masese, F.O., Irvine, K.,
Ajode, Z.M., Obiero, K. and Barasa, J.E., (2023). Monitoring biodiversity loss in rapidly changing
Afrotropical ecosystems: an emerging imperative for governance and research. Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society B, 378(1881), p.20220271.
2. Buechley, E.R., Santangeli, A., Girardello, M., Neate‐Clegg, M.H., Oleyar, D., McClure, C.J. and
Şekercioğlu, Ç.H., (2019). Global raptor research and conservation priorities: Tropical raptors fall prey to
knowledge gaps. Diversity and Distributions, 25(6), pp.856-869.
3. Fleischmann, A., München, B.S. and GeoBio-Center, L.M.U., (2018). Carnivorous plants and conservation–
the role of carnivorous plant enthusiasts.
4. Hernandez, J.O., Buot Jr, I.E. and Park, B.B., (2022). Prioritizing choices in the conservation of flora and
fauna: Research trends and methodological approaches. Land, 11(10), p.1645.
5. Isbell, F., Balvanera, P., Mori, A.S., He, J.S., Bullock, J.M., Regmi, G.R., Seabloom, E.W., Ferrier, S., Sala,
O.E., Guerrero‐Ramírez, N.R. and Tavella, J., (2023). Expert perspectives on global biodiversity loss and its
drivers and impacts on people. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 21(2), pp.94-103.
6. Kor, L. and Diazgranados, M., (2023). Identifying important plant areas for useful plant species in
Colombia. Biological Conservation, 284, p.110187.
7. Kulak, V., Longboat, S., Brunet, N.D., Shukla, M. and Saxena, P., (2022). In vitro technology in plant
conservation: Relevance to biocultural diversity. Plants, 11(4), p.503.
8. Lannuzel, G., Pouget, L., Bruy, D., Hequet, V., Meyer, S., Munzinger, J. and Gâteblé, G., (2022). Mining
rare Earth elements: Identifying the plant species most threatened by ore extraction in an insular hotspot.
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 10, p.740.
9. León-Cortés, J.L., Haaland, C., Pryke, J.S. and Maes, D., (2023). Special issue on insect conservation in
biodiversity hotspots. Journal of insect conservation, 27(1), pp.1-2.
10. Moir, M.L. and Young, D.A., (2023). Insects from the southwest Australia biodiversity hotspot: a barometer
of diversity and threat status of nine host-dependent families across three orders. Journal of Insect
Conservation, 27(1), pp.3-18.
11. Pirie, M.D., Blackhall‐Miles, R., Bourke, G., Crowley, D., Ebrahim, I., Forest, F., Knaack, M., Koopman,
R., Lansdowne, A., Nürk, N.M. and Osborne, J., (2022). Preventing species extinctions: A global
conservation consortium for Erica. Plants, People, Planet, 4(4), pp.335-344.
12. Pirie, M.D., Blackhall‐Miles, R., Bourke, G., Crowley, D., Ebrahim, I., Forest, F., Knaack, M., Koopman,
R., Lansdowne, A., Nürk, N.M. and Osborne, J., (2022). Preventing species extinctions: A global
conservation consortium for Erica. Plants, People, Planet, 4(4), pp.335- 344.
13. Sinthumule, N.I., (2023). Traditional ecological knowledge and its role in biodiversity conservation: a
systematic review. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, p.1164900.
14. Stephenson, P.J., Londoño-Murcia, M.C., Borges, P.A., Claassens, L., Frisch-Nwakanma, H., Ling, N.,
McMullan-Fisher, S., Meeuwig, J.J., Unter, K.M.M., Walls, J.L. and Burfield, I.J., (2022). Measuring the
impact of conservation: the growing importance of monitoring fauna, flora and funga. Diversity, 14(10),
p.824.
15. Ye, J., Shan, Z., Peng, D., Sun, M., Niu, Y., Liu, Y., Zhang, Q., Yang, Y., Lin, Q., Chen, J. and Zhu, R.,
(2023). Identifying gaps in the ex situ conservation of native plant diversity in China. Biological
Conservation, 282, p.110044.
