C.F. Reed
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.140924
Element CodePMORC0Q0F0
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVascular Plant
IUCNVulnerable
CITESAppendix II
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomPlantae
PhylumAnthophyta
ClassMonocotyledoneae
OrderOrchidales
FamilyOrchidaceae
GenusCypripedium
SynonymsCypripedium furcatumRaf.
Other Common NamesKentucky lady's slipper (EN) Southern Yellow Lady's-slipper (EN)
Concept ReferenceKartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Taxonomic CommentsCypripedium kentuckiense was recognized as a distinct species in the 1970s; it was formerly confused with various other members of the Cypripedium calceolus group. Isozyme data suggest that Cypripedium kentuckiense should be recognized as a distinct species, possibly of recent origin from Cypripedium parviflorum (Case et al. 1998).
Conservation Status
Rank MethodLegacy Rank calculation - Biotics v1
Review Date2020-03-19
Change Date1986-11-04
Edition Date2020-03-19
Edition AuthorsD. Gries(1997), rev. V. Ham and K. Maybury (2002), rev. K. Gravuer (2010), rev. Treher and Oliver (2020)
Threat ImpactHigh
Range Extent20,000-200,000 square km (about 8000-80,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences81 - 300
Rank ReasonsCypripedium kentuckiense occurs in a somewhat narrow range from the Cumberland Plateau of eastern Kentucky and northern Tennessee with outlier populations in central Georgia and Coastal Plain Virginia, west to the Interior Highlands of Arkansas and southeastern Oklahoma, and south to the Gulf Coastal Plain of Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Its moderate range is somewhat misleading as most sites/populations are quite small; approximately 100-200 occurrences are believed extant, but less than 30 of these may have good viability. Collection is a threat with many incidents of poaching documented. Other threats include herbivory by white-tailed deer, disturbance by feral hogs, road construction, and habitat destruction due to logging, pine agriculture, and reservoir construction. This species' habitat has been considerably reduced from its historical extent. Believed to be moderately declining in Arkansas and significantly declining in Kentucky; these two states contain the majority of extant occurrences. However, occurrences in some other parts of the range appear to be stable.
Range Extent CommentsCypripedium kentuckiense is found on the Cumberland Plateau of Kentucky and northern Tennessee; the Tennessee Uplands; the Interior Highlands of Arkansas, Oklahoma, and potentially Missouri (many sites in the Ouachita Mountains and some in the Ozark Mountains); the Piedmont and Gulf/Upper Gulf Coastal Plains of Alabama and the Gulf Coastal Plain of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi (Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory 2001, A. Schotz, pers. comm., 2002). Also occurs disjunctly on the Atlantic Coastal Plain of Virginia and Georgia (T. Patrick, pers. comm., 2002).
Occurrences CommentsApproximately 100-200 occurrences are believed extant (about 100 confirmed extant and 100 not yet assessed). There are 141 occurrences in Arkansas (pers. comm. B. Baker 2020), with significant numbers in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Louisiana as well, and the remainder scattered throughout the rest of range. An additional 19 occurrences are considered historical or extirpated.
Threat Impact CommentsHabitat destruction and collection are the primary threats to this species, but there are others that need to be considered that additively create a high threat level.
Cypripedium kentuckiense is actively collected for sale (D. White, pers. comm. 2002) and pressure to raid natural populations may be increasing, even though the species is advertised by several nurseries as available laboratory-propagated (T. Patrick pers. comm., 2002). Serious collection pressure exists in Arkansas, with documented incidents of poaching (T. Witsell, pers. comm. 2006, 2010, 2020). The Georgia site is treated as confidential and access has been restricted to avoid unauthorized plant collection (T. Patrick, pers. comm. 2002).
Also threatened by other types of habitat destruction such as development, logging, pine agriculture, and reservoir construction (Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory 2001). In Kentucky, one population of 500 plants along Negro Creek was destroyed in clearing for a Wal-Mart (Gibson 2011). At the Georgia site, logging of hardwoods and conversion to pine monoculture is an imminent threat (T. Patrick, pers. comm., 2002).
Herbivory by white-tailed deer is another serious threat across many parts of the range, and disturbance by feral hogs is an issue in a number of areas. In addition, road/highway construction is a threat in many areas, both the actual construction taking place on a site where the plants occur and the resultant changes in hydrology over a wider area (Tennessee Natural Heritage Program 2001, D. White, pers. comm., 2002, T. Witsell, pers. comm., 2010). In Texas, some sites contain no reproductive individuals, likely because Texas represents a relict area of distribution for this species (J. Poole and J. Singhurst, pers. comm., 2010).