Comment | Published:

Seed banking not an option for many threatened plants

Nature Plantsvolume 4pages848850 (2018) | Download Citation

The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation requires 75% of threatened plant species conserved ex situ by 2020. Currently, ex situ conservation focuses on conventional seed banking, yet this method is unsuitable for many threatened species. The 75% target is unattainable without urgent investment into alternative techniques.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Li, D.-Z. & Pritchard, H. W. Trends Plant Sci. 14, 614–621 (2009).

  2. 2.

    Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. The targets 2011–2020. Convention on Biological Diversity https://www.cbd.int/gspc/targets.shtml (2011).

  3. 3.

    Mounce, R., Smith, P. & Brockington, S. Nat. Plants 3, 795–802 (2017).

  4. 4.

    Potter, K. M. et al. New Forest. 48, 153–180 (2017).

  5. 5.

    Teixido, A. L. et al. Biodivers. Conserv. 26, 703–716 (2017).

  6. 6.

    O’Donnell, K. & Sharrock, S. Plant Diversity 39, 373–378 (2018).

  7. 7.

    Sommerville, K. D. et al. Aust. J. Bot. 65, 609–624 (2018).

  8. 8.

    Hay, F. R. & Probert, R. J. Conserv. Physiol. 1, cot030 (2013).

  9. 9.

    Wyse, S. V. & Dickie, J. B. J. Ecol. 105, 1082–1093 (2017).

  10. 10.

    Tweddle, J. C., Dickie, J. B., Baskin, C. C. & Baskin, J. M. J. Ecol. 91, 294–304 (2003).

  11. 11.

    Wyse, S. V. & Dickie, J. B. Ann. Bot. 121, 71–83 (2018).

  12. 12.

    Beech, E., Rivers, M., Oldfield, S. & Smith, P. P. J. Sustain. Forest. 36, 454–489 (2017).

  13. 13.

    Crawford, A. D., Steadman, K. J., Plummer, J. A., Cochrane, A. & Probert, R. J. Aust. J. Bot. 55, 18–29 (2007).

  14. 14.

    Fant, J. B. et al. Am. J. Bot. 103, 1541–1543 (2016).

  15. 15.

    Ballesteros, D. & Pence, V. C. CryoLetters 38, 278–289 (2017).

  16. 16.

    Walters, C. Planta 242, 397–406 (2015).

  17. 17.

    Olson, D. M. et al. Bioscience 51, 933–938 (2001).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, is part funded by Grant in Aid from the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Wakehurst Place, Ardingly, UK

    • Sarah V. Wyse
    •  & John B. Dickie
  2. The Bio-Protection Research Centre, Lincoln University, Lincoln, Canterbury, New Zealand

    • Sarah V. Wyse
  3. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, UK

    • Katherine J. Willis
  4. Oxford Long-term Ecology Laboratory, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    • Katherine J. Willis

Authors

  1. Search for Sarah V. Wyse in:

  2. Search for John B. Dickie in:

  3. Search for Katherine J. Willis in:

Contributions

SVW undertook the analyses; SVW, JBD and KJW wrote the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah V. Wyse.

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-018-0298-3

Newsletter Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing