Gaps in In-situ and Ex-situ Conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plant Species of Sri Lanka; Towards Their Effective Conservation

Gaps in In-situ and Ex-situ Conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plant Species of Sri Lanka; Towards Their Effective Conservation | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Gaps in In-situ and Ex-situ Conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plant Species of Sri Lanka; Towards Their Effective Conservation C. L. Jayaweera, R. W.M.T.N. Rajakaruna, K. M.G.G. Jayasuriya, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4409027/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Sri Lanka is a country rich in biodiversity, harboring 1476 plant species with medicinal values, 307 of which are threatened. These medicinal plants have long been a valuable resource in traditional medicine, reflecting a well-documented historical legacy. However, the fact that 20% of these medicinal plants are listed as threatened poses a major conservation challenge. This study addresses the need for effective conservation strategies for threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka. The study focuses on using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to monitor the distribution of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka, prioritizing the species and areas for conservation and needs for ex-situ conservation. Using comprehensive datasets on the distribution of threatened medicinal plants from scientific literature, institutes, and herbarium collections, we assessed the priority areas within existing protected areas for in-situ conservation and ex-situ conservation status in Government Medicinal Plant Gardens. The research highlights the significance of Sinharaja rainforest and Peak Wilderness Sanctuary (Sri Padaya) as important protected areas with high species richness, housing 68 and 83 threatened medicinal plants respectively. Our findings show that a substantial proportion of threatened medicinal plants are distributed outside of protected areas, highlighting the need of establishing new protected areas as well as expanding the existing protected areas to conserve these unprotected threatened medicinal plants. Ex-situ conservation efforts were found to be crucial, especially for overexploited and endangered species. Our study highlights the importance of integrating GIS technology into conservation management to ensure the effective conservation of Sri Lankan medicinal plants for future generations. Threatened medicinal plants Conservation strategies Geographic Information System (GIS) Distribution maps Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Introduction Flora of Sri Lanka with a diversity of plants with medicinal properties has the potential to alleviate various health problems (Gunawardana and Jayasuriya, 2019 ). In Sri Lanka, traditional medicine is a major source of primary healthcare for 60–70% of the rural population, using various plant parts including leaves, roots, fruits, flowers and twigs (Perera, 2012 ). The World Health Organization reports that the majority of the population in developing countries, including Sri Lanka, rely on traditional medical systems (WHO, 2022). Sri Lanka, a country known to be rich in biodiversity, harbors 3087 species of Angiosperms and 926 Bryophytes (The National Red List, 2020), with 1476 species [(Rajakaruna et al ., (unpublished data)] recognized for their medicinal value. Due to various threats, at present, 307 medicinal plant species are listed as threatened [(Rajakaruna et al ., (unpublished data)]. According to Ratnayake and Kariyawasam, ( 2007 ), approximately 50% of the medicinal plants on the island grow in natural forests, some of which are restricted to particularly unique habitats. Due to the destruction of forests, expansion of traditional medicinal material production, increased demand for raw materials, and lack of organized planting and unscientific exploitation of medicinal plants, certain medicinal plant species are on the verge of extinction (Weragoda, 1980 ). While the world faces critical challenges in slowing the accelerated rate of biodiversity loss (Cardinale et al., 2012 ; Wake and Vredenburg, 2008 ), conservationists have increasingly called for conservation efforts to be prioritized (Parr et al., 2009 ; Wilson et al., 2011 ). Further, it is important to prioritize species for conservation as the number of species threatened with extinction outweighs the resources available for their conservation (Gauthier et al., 2010 ; Pimm et al., 2014 ). In response to the global biodiversity crisis, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has developed the 'Red List of Threatened Species’, a comprehensive framework assessing extinction risk and species distribution (Pollock et al., 2003 ; Brooks et al., 2004 ). Species are classified into threat categories; Extinct (EX), Extinct in the wild (EW), Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU), Near Threatened (NT), Least Concern (LC) and Data Deficient (DD) through assessment against quantitative criteria based on indicators of extinction risk (Collen et al. 2016 ; Hammer and Khoshbakht 2005 ). With urgency, countries around the world, including Sri Lanka, are incorporating IUCN criteria into their conservation policies and multilateral agreements (Maxted et al., 1997 ; Rodrigues et al., 2006 ). Recognizing the urgency of conservation and gaps in data, the present study focuses on the application of Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to identify the gaps in in-situ and ex-situ conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plants (TMPs) of Sri Lanka. Information needs for biodiversity conservation are many and varied, and the state of knowledge is often unsatisfactory to make appropriate assessments (Heywood, 1997 ). The existing information and available methods for obtaining the best conservation strategy for different plant species should be integrated. Responding to this need, our research integrates Geographic Information System (GIS) technology for generating data related to the protected aspects of conservation. Remote sensing (RS) imagery GIS layers are used as predictors in the analysis of vegetation and modeling (Goodchild et al., 1993 ; Dirnböck et al., 2003 ). The latest advances in RS technologies strengthen its use in capturing measurements of biodiversity on earth and in addressing in-situ and ex-situ biodiversity conservation efforts by adding value to the detection of species, ecological communities and patterns of species richness (Prasad et al., 2015 ). Responding to this requirement, our research integrates GIS technology for evaluating the priorities related to distribution for high-priority TMPs, habitat protection needs of TMPs in in-situ conservation and, needs for establishing ex-situ conservation. To achieve this goal, identifying and prioritizing medicinal plant species and areas for conservation are essential preliminary steps toward establishing effective in-situ and developing ex-situ conservation practices. These steps are crucial for planning effective conservation strategies and policy development. In Sri Lanka, protected areas are defined as clearly demarcated geographical spaces managed by either the Departments of Forest Conservation or Wildlife Conservation, aimed at achieving the long-term conservation of nature and associated ecosystem services and cultural values. These protected areas include Strict Nature Reserves, Forest Reserves, Forest Corridors, National Parks, and Sanctuaries, and are legally protected to varying extents to prevent encroachment and exploitation of forest resources and wildlife. They play a crucial role in safeguarding Sri Lanka’s natural heritage and are managed through legal or other effective means to ensure their conservation. Thus, wild species in a protected area are more protected from anthropogenic threats (Sajeevan et al., 2023 ). In addition, seed banks play an important role in conservation efforts by preserving the genetic diversity of plant species while ensuring their survival in the face of environmental challenges and threats such as habitat degradation and climate change. Further, they are an invaluable resource for research, restoration, and sustainable use of plant biodiversity. The goal of gap analysis is to evaluate all ecosystems, determine areas rich in medicinal plant species diversity, and assess whether these species-rich areas are adequately represented in protected areas. Areas identified as important via the gap analysis can then be examined more closely for their biological qualities and management needs. The level of species rich areas outside the protected areas system needs to be taken into account in future national conservation planning. According to Ratnayake et al., ( 2021 ) Sri Lankan medicinal plant species are under threat due to future climate change projections and suggests that their conservation in existing habitats and ex-situ conservation methods are crucial. A comprehensive collection of distribution data of medicinal plant species is available in the literature, the National herbarium of Sri Lanka, and the Government Institutes. However, species distribution data are not scattered and there are no studies available that have identified high-priority species based on their conservation status and areas for conservation of medicinal plant species. Therefore, the specific objectives include: (a) producing a distribution map of TMPs in Sri Lanka, and (b) investigating the proportion of TMP populations located inside and outside existing protected areas. This information is used to identify new high-priority areas for in-situ conservation and to determine species that are not yet represented in ex-situ seed banks. Materials and Methods In-situ conservation status of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka Distribution data of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka The list of the TMPs in Sri Lanka was sourced from Rajakaruna et al ., (unpublished data), GPS coordinates of the TMPs were obtained from recent scientific literature (from 1999 to 2022), The Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon and from the herbarium specimens located in National Herbarium, Royal Botanic Gardens, Peradeniya. The total TMPs recorded were georeferenced and organized in ArcGIS 10.4 (Esri, 380 New York CA 92373 − 8100) according to the forest and Divisional Secretary's Divisions (DSDs). However, this might overestimate the distribution of certain plant species due to the lack of exact distribution points. We assume that this provides the most possibly accurate distribution based on the available data. Determination of priority areas for conservation based on threatened medicinal plant richness To determine the areas of species richness, the georeferenced data of the TMPs were merged into a single map using ArcGIS software. The richness of TMPs in each protected areas was calculated by aggregating individual plant distribution presence-absence data within protected areas. Determination of priority species for conservation based on Protective Status of threatened medicinal plants The protected area map of Sri Lanka was obtained from the literature (Sajeevan et al., 2023 ). The total distribution of a plant species within the island and the distribution within the protected areas was calculated separately using ArcGIS. By employing these figures, the protective status for each species was calculated with the equation below; Protective Status (PS) = Plant distribution in protected areas (PA) X 100% Plant total distribution The distribution of TMPs based on their calculated protective status was categorized into four categories as indicated in Fig. 1 . For plant species with 0% protective status, it indicates a lack of distribution of the TMPs within protected areas. A protective status in the range of 0%-50% was considered to indicate a lower distribution, while a protective status in the range of 50%-75% was considered as moderate. A protective status between 75%-95% was considered of higher distribution, and a protective status of 95%-100% indicates that the plant is exclusively confined to protected areas (Fig. 1 ). Ex-Situ conservation status of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka The ex-situ conservation of TMPs in Sri Lanka was investigated in the following Government Medicinal Plant Gardens (MPG): The Bandaranaike Memorial Ayurvedic Research Institute (BMARI); Research and Extension Services National Herbal Gardens in Haldummulla, Girandurukotte, Pallekele, Pattipola, and Pinnaduwa; and Ganewatta Medicinal Plant Garden. Locations that were obtained from the MPGs were compared against the total distribution of a plant species within the island which was in turn used to calculate the percentage of TMP populations stored in ex-situ collections. Results & Discussion Distribution of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka During the present study, updated distribution maps of TMPs in Sri Lanka were created using a comprehensive dataset comprising, a total of 284 geographical distribution data of TMPs among 307 TMPs (Fig. 2 ) from the scientific literature (2022), The National Herbarium, and The Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon. This is an important initial step in conserving and monitoring the existing TMP populations, as existing data are outdated and scattered. It is worth noting that only 284 TMP distributions were found out of 307 TMPs due to potential unrecorded occurrences. Each TMP was designated an acronym for easy reference (Appendix 1). Priority areas for conservation based on threatened medicinal plants richness The distribution of Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU) medicinal plant species in Sri Lanka across its 65,569 km 2 is noteworthy (Fig. 3 ). Accordingly, these species represent proportions of 13%, 41%, and 65%, respectively of the whole land area of the island, contributing significantly to the understanding of Sri Lanka's diverse and ecologically significant flora. TMPs are distributed within 70% of the total land area of the country. In the context of protective status, where conservation efforts are concentrated, specifically, within protected areas, CR TMPs constitute 27% of their total distribution, while EN and VU TMPs account for 23% and 20% respectively, when considering their respective total distributions. It underscores the urgent need to broaden the conservation efforts beyond protected areas to encompass a more comprehensive approach. Accordingly, the study highlights the vulnerability of these TMPs as their distribution within the protected areas is very low. Larger protected areas such as Peak Wilderness Sanctuary and Sinharaja Forest Reserve, have different richness values with plant’s local distribution. Altogether protected areas have higher plant richness than the average richness values that are shown in Fig. 4 . Priority species for conservation based on Protective Status of threatened medicinal plants The term ‘protective status’ denotes the proportion of protected area relative to the total medicinal plant distribution. Specifically, a lower protective status suggests a lower distribution of TMP within protected areas, accompanied by a more extensive dispersion beyond these specified zones. Conversely, a higher protective status correlates with an augmented concentration of TMP distribution within protected areas or strict confinement to such designated regions (Fig. 5 ). It is crucial to recognize that TMP distribution may vary from higher to lower. Therefore, assessing the area of overall distribution is essential for determining their conservation status. The conservation status of these species should take into account not only their presence in protected areas but also the broader context of their distribution to develop a more comprehensive understanding of their conservation needs and challenges. It is important to note that some plant species share the same protective status value but exhibit significantly different distributions. Therefore, when evaluating a plant species, the plant's total distribution as well as its distribution within the protected areas independently and individually should be taken into account (Fig. 6 ). The Fig. 6 illustrates the distribution of TMPs in relation to their respective protective status. Both the overall distribution and the distribution within protected areas have been graphed, as protective status is a ratio derived from these values. When examining CR TMPs (29 plants), 76% of them are located in areas characterized by low protective status, 14% in those with moderate protective status, and 10% in areas with higher protective status (Fig. 5 ). Madhuca clavata (C16) and Olea paniculata (C20) are confined to protected areas with potential distributions spanning 101.5 km² and 0.1 km² respectively. Despite both having a protective status of 100%, distribution of C16 surpasses that of C20, as illustrated in Fig. 6 (a) and 6(b). On the other hand, Xylocarpus rumphii (C29) exhibits the highest distribution among CR plants covering 1700 Km 2 . Additionally, Nymphoides aurantiaca (C18) exhibits a protective status of 0% with a distribution spanning 117 km², while C16 showcases a protective status of 100% and a distribution of 101.5 km². This suggests that while their distributions may appear similar, their protective status can vary due to their confinement within protected areas, as depicted in Fig. 6 (a) and 6(b). Considering the TMPs under the EN category (102 plants), 82% are found with low protective status, 8% with moderate protective status, and 10% with higher protective status. Balanophora fungosa (E7), Calamus zeylanicus (E15), Diospyros atrata (E32), Diospyros oppositifolia (E34), Gardenia crameri (E45), and Loeseneriella macrantha (E64) are restricted to protected areas. The distributions of Loeseneriella macrantha (E64), Balanophora fungosa (E7), Diospyros atrata (E32), Gardenia crameri (E45), Calamus zeylanicus (E15), and Diospyros oppositifolia (E34) span 1657 km², 454 km², 315 km², 188.5 km², 179.5 km², and 9 km² respectively, indicating that even with equal protective status, total distributions may vary [(Fig. 6 (c) and 6(d)]. This discrepancy explains the complexity of conservation dynamics, wherein even within the confines of protected areas, species' habitat preferences and ecological niches play crucial roles in determining their distribution ranges. Furthermore, Munronia pinnata (E71) boasts the highest distribution of 6343 km² with a protective status of 26.8%, indicating that despite its extensive distribution, it receives relatively less protection within protected areas [(Fig. 6 (c) and 6(d)]. This suggests the need for more effective conservation strategies tailored to address the specific ecological requirements and threats faced by individual species. Another comparison is between Memecylon hookeri (E69) with a protective status of 0% and Diospyros oppositifolia (E34), with a protective status of 100%; despite this contrast, their distributions are somewhat similar, spanning 23 km² and 9 km² respectively. This complexity necessitates plans to conservation, taking into account not only protective status but also factors like habitat fragmentation, anthropogenic pressures, and climate change impacts, to ensure the long-term survival of TMPs. Considering the TMPs under the VU category (153 plants), 88% are located in areas characterized by low protective status, 8% in those with moderate protective status, and 4% in areas with higher protective status. Asparagus gonoclados (V23), Palaquium thwaitesii (V116), Semecarpus subpeltata (V131), and Tinospora sinensis (V146) are restricted to protected areas with respective distributions of 345 km², 277 km², 254 km², and 27 km² [Figure 6 (e) and 6(f)]. V146, despite having a protective status of 100%, exhibits a relatively smaller distribution of 27 km². In contrast, Cinnamomum verum (V45) claims a distribution of 39 km² despite having a protective status of 0%. Therefore, comprehensive monitoring and research are essential to better understand the drivers of species distribution and to inform adaptive management strategies. The species richness is a fundamental measurement of community and regional diversity that underlies ecological models and conservation strategies. Highlighting the importance such analysis, the present study revealed that the distribution of TMP richness in Sri Lanka is not uniform (Fig. 3 ). This is not surprising as when considering the distribution of whole angiosperm flora, higher species richness is recorded in the Central and South West Region of Sri Lanka (Gunatilleke et al., 2008 ; Wijesundara, 2022 ). Protected areas with high species richness include Sinharaja rainforest, Peak Wilderness Sanctuary (Sri Padaya), Hantana mountain range, Elahera forest reserve, and Knuckles forest reserve each harboring over 50 TMPs (Fig. 4 ). Among the mapped 205 protected areas housing TMPs, over 50%, specifically 121 areas, support less than 10 TMPs. In such instances, an efficient conservation strategy could involve expanding the existing protected areas. This approach has demonstrated its significance as a cost-effective method to safeguard threatened species, requiring fewer resources compared to the establishment of new protected areas. This is not only applicable to TMPs but also other important plants species where Sajeevan et al., ( 2023 ) also suggesting enlarging the protected areas would be effective for including populations in the periphery of protected areas for more effective conservation of crop wild relatives such as rice. Despite relying on protected areas as the primary strategy for conserving threatened species, many countries face challenges as these areas alone may not be sufficient. In many instances, threatened species continue on a trajectory toward extinction. All countries need to recognize the need for targeted in-situ species conservation and invest much greater effort and resources in the recovery of threatened or other important species. Even in countries with well-developed recovery programs, many action plans for species recovery remain to be completed or even implemented in a timely manner (Dorey and Walker, 2018 ). The categorization of Sri Lanka as a global biodiversity hotspot not only indicates that the country contains an exceptionally high number of unique plant and animal species, but also that at least 75% of the natural habitats that these species inhabit have already been lost (Cincotta et al., 2000 ). Sri Lanka’s forest cover has depleted to 29.2% over the past years (Premakantha et al., 2021 ). Despite the establishment of protected areas by the Sri Lankan Government over the past 100 years, rapid forest losses have been recorded in the recent decades (Ranagalage et al., 2020 ). Therefore, to ensure the survival of these threatened species, ex-situ conservation measures should be implemented. Ex-Situ Conservation status of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka With the practical difficulties in expanding the protected areas we strongly recommend the proper implementation of the ex-situ conservation as only around 28.34% of the 307 TMPs are represented in ex-situ collections maintained under the Government. The Government MPGs collectively house 24% of CR TMPs, 28% of EN TMPs, and 30% of VU TMPs (Fig. 7 ). These statistics underscore a significant gap in ex-situ conservation efforts for TMPs in Sri Lanka. The results show that Pinnaduwa MPG is the richest ex-situ conservation site and contains the highest priority taxa for ex-situ conservation (Fig. 8 ). The geographic distribution of most of those TMPs with ex-situ collections was low when compared to their distribution of in-situ range. Ex-situ conservation is not always sharply separated from in-situ conservation, but it is an effective complement to it, especially for those overexploited and endangered medicinal plants with slow growth, low abundance, and high susceptibility to replanting diseases. Ex-situ conservation aims to cultivate and naturalize threatened species to ensure their continued survival and sometimes to produce large quantities of planting material used in the creation of drugs, and it is often an immediate action taken to sustain medicinal plant resources. Many species of previously wild medicinal plants can not only retain high potency when grown in gardens far away from the habitats where they naturally occur, but can also have their reproductive materials selected and stored in seed banks for future replanting. Unfortunately, there are no seed banks storing Sri Lankan medicinal plant species. The only seed bank occurs in Sri Lanka, is the seed bank at the Plant Genetic Resources Center at Gannoruwa which only stores seeds of crop and crop wild relative species (Ganashan et al., 1995 ). Given the limited research conducted on medicinal plants in Sri Lanka such as Warakagoda et al ., 2015, Fonseka et al., 2019 , and Jayawardhane et al., 2021 , further exploration and studies should be conducted. The present study highlights the critical status of TMPs in Sri Lanka, emphasizing the urgency for conservation efforts. The distribution and protective status analysis reveals significant challenges, with many species exhibiting low distribution within protected areas and facing potential threats. While existing protected areas play a crucial role, they alone may not be sufficient to protect these species. Therefore, a comprehensive approach integrating both in-situ and ex-situ conservation strategies is imperative. Our findings suggest the importance of expanding protected areas, especially in regions with high TMP richness, as a cost-effective conservation measure. Moreover, the establishment of seed banks specifically for TMPs is essential for long-term conservation efforts. Despite these recommendations, challenges persist, including limited resources for conservation initiatives and incomplete implementation of recovery plans. As such, concerted efforts are needed to address these limitations and ensure the preservation of Sri Lanka's rich biodiversity heritage for future generations. One of the primary challenges hindering the conservation of TMPs in Sri Lanka is the limited recording of species occurrences. Without comprehensive and accurate data on species distribution and habitat preferences, it becomes exceedingly difficult to devise effective conservation strategies. To conserve TMPs effectively, it is imperative to have precise location information, enabling targeted conservation efforts in areas where these species are most vulnerable. Therefore, there is an urgent need to prioritize the collection of detailed location data for TMPs, ensuring that conservation efforts are directed towards areas where they are most needed. Addressing this challenge and improving data collection efforts are essential steps towards ensuring the long-term survival of TMPs in Sri Lanka. Conclusions In conclusion, this study highlighted important insights into the conservation status of TMPs in Sri Lanka, addressing key factors such as distribution, priority areas for conservation, and the significance of ex-situ conservation efforts. The richness of TMPs is primarily concentrated in the Central and South West Region of Sri Lanka, emphasizing the importance of targeted areas for conservation. The significance of protected areas such as Sinharaja rainforest, Peak Wilderness Sanctuary, and etc., hosting over 50 TMPs, were identified. Approximately only 28.34% of the 307 TMPs are present in ex-situ collections. It recommends the expansion of existing protected areas to ensure the protection of diverse plant populations especially in regions with lower TMP richness. The paper advocates increased efforts and resources to recover TMPs, acknowledging the challenges faced by protected areas alone. The integration of GIS technology, combined with distribution mapping and prioritization strategies, provides stakeholders and policy makers with a valuable tool for making informed decisions to safeguard the rich biodiversity of medicinal plant species in the country. Declarations Data Availability The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. Funding The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript. Author Contribution RWMTNR and CLJ participated in writing the original draft of the manuscript, data analysis, and generating the figures. All authors contributed to the study conception, methodology, design, and visualization. CLJ generated detailed maps and detailed graphs. RWMTNR, DMDY, and KMGGJ participated in data collection. KMGGJ and DMDY contributed to the editing and reviewing of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Acknowledgements We would like to express our gratitude for the support of Mr. W.P. Wanigasinghe of the Department of Forest Conservation of Sri Lanka, Dr. Dammika Abeygunawardana of the Department of Ayurveda of Sri Lanka, the Department of National Botanic Gardens of Sri Lanka, The Bandaranaike Memorial Ayurvedic Research Institute (BMARI), Sri Lanka, Research and Extension Services National Herbal Gardens in Haldummulla, Girandurukotte, Pallekele, Pattipola, and Pinnaduwa, Sri Lanka, and Ganewatta Medicinal Plant Garden in Sri Lanka. References Brooks TM, Bakarr MI, Boucher T, Fonseca GABD, Hilton-Taylor C, Hoekstra JM, Moritz T, Olivieri S, Parrish J, Pressey RL, Rodrigues ASL, Sechrest W, Stattersfield A, Strahm W, Stuart SN (2004) Coverage Provided by the Global Protected-Area System: Is It Enough? BioScience, 54 (12), 1081–1091 doi.org/ 10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[1081:CPBTGP]2.0.CO;2 Cardinale BJ, Duffy JE, Gonzalez A, Hooper DU, Perrings C, Venail P, Narwani A, MacE GM, Tilman D, Wardle DA, Kinzig AP, Daily GC, Loreau M, Grace JB, Larigauderie A, Srivastava DS, Naeem S (2012) Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486(7401):59–67. doi.org/10.1038/nature11148 Cincotta RP, Wisnewski J, Engelman R (2000) Human population in the biodiversity hotspots. Nature 404(6781):990–992 Collen B, Dulvy NK, Gaston KJ, Gärdenfors U, Keith DA, Punt AE, Regan HM, Böhm M, Hedges S, Seddon M, Butchart SHM, Hilton-Taylor C, Hoffmann M, Bachman SP, Akçakaya HR (2016) Clarifying misconceptions of extinction risk assessment with the IUCN Red List. Biol Lett 12(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2015.0843 Dassanayake MD, Clayton WD (eds) (1996–2000) A Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon, Volumes X-XIV. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. New Delhi Dassanayake MD, Fosberg FR, Clayton WD (eds) (1994) A Revised Hand-book to the Flora of Ceylon, Volume XIII. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt, New Delhi Dassanayake MD, Fosberg FR, Clayton WD (eds) (1995) A Revised Hand- book to the Flora of Ceylon, Volume IX. Amerind Publishing Co. Pvt, New Delhi Dassanayake MD, Fosberg FR (eds) (1980–1991). A Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon, Volumes I-VII . Amerind Publishing Co. Pvt. New Delhi Dirnböck T, Dullinger S, Grabherr G (2003) A regional impact assessment of climate and land-use change on alpine vegetation. J Biogeogr 30(3):401–417. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2699.2003.00839.x Dorey K, Walker TR (2018) Limitations of threatened species lists in Canada: a federal and provincial perspective. Biol Conserv 217:259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.11.018 Fonseka DLCK, Wickramaarachchi WWUI, Madushani RPS (2019) Synthetic seed production as a tool for the conservation and domestication of Celastrus paniculatus: a rare medicinal plant. Annual Res Rev Biology 32(4):1–8. https://doi.org/10.9734/arrb/2019/ Ganashan P, Balendira S, Dassanayake MD (1995) Country Report to the FAO International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources. Available online at https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/PGR/SoW1/asia/SRILANKA.pdf . Accessed on 19/02/2024 Gauthier P, Debussche M, Thompson JD (2010) Regional priority setting for rare species based on a method combining three criteria. Biol Conserv 143(6):1501–1509. doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.03.032 Goodchild MF, Steyaert LT, Parks BO (1993) GIS and environmental modeling. GIS World Books, Fort Collins Gunatilleke N, Pethiyagoda R, Gunatilleke S (2008) Biodiversity of Sri Lanka. J Natl Foundation Sri Lanka 36:25–62. 10.4038/jnsfsr.v36i0.8047 Gunawardana SLA, Jayasuriya WJABN (2019) Medicinally important herbal flowers in Sri Lanka. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine . doi.org/10.1155/2019/2321961 Hammer K, Khoshbakht K (2005) Towards a ‘Red List’ for crop plant species. Genet Resour Crop Evol 52:249–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-004-7550-6 Heywood VH (1997) Information needs in biodiversity assessments-from genes to ecosystems. Biodiversity information: needs and options. Proceedings of the 1996 International Workshop on Biodiversity Information, held in London, UK , 5–20 Jayawardhane J, Damunupola JW, Jayasuriya KMGG (2021) Propagation of three important medicinal plants in Aacanthaceae; Andrographis paniculata, Barleria prionitis and Rhinacanthus polonnaruwensis. Ceylon J Sci 50(2):129–137. http://doi.org/10.4038/cjs.v50i2.7874 Maxted N, Hawkes JG, Guarino L, Sawkins M (1997) Towards the selection of taxa for plant genetic conservation. Genet Resour Crop Evol 44:337–348 Parr CL, Woinarski JCZ, Pienaar DJ (2009) Cornerstones of biodiversity conservation? Comparing the management effectiveness of Kruger and Kakadu National Parks, two key savanna reserves. Biodivers Conserv 18(13):3643–3662. doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9669-4 Perera PK (2012) Current Scenario of Ayurveda and Traditional Medicine in Sri Lanka. 4th Herbal International Summit-Cum-Exhibition on Medicinal, Aromatic Products, Spices and Finished Products. Available online at https:// . Accessed on 20th January 2024 Pimm SL, Jenkins CN, Abell R, Brooks TM, Gittleman JL, Joppa LN, Raven PH, Roberts CM, Sexton JO (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344(6187). doi.org/10.1126/science.1246752 Pollock C, Mace GM, Hilton-Taylor C, de Iongh HH, Bánki OS, Bergmans W (2003) & van der Werff ten Bosch, M. J. The revised IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, Version 3.1. The Harmonization of Red Lists for Threatened Species in Europe. Leiden (The Netherlands): The Netherlands Commission for International Nature Protection , 33–48 Prasad N, Semwal M, Roy PS (2015) Remote sensing and GIS for biodiversity conservation. Recent Adv Lichenology: Mod Methods Approaches Biomonitoring Bioprospection 1:151–179 Premakantha KT, Chandani RPDS, Kingsly SAD, Dias HU, Kekulandara, N.S.B (2021) Forest cover assessment in Sri Lanka using high resolution satellite images. Sri Lanka Forester 40:1–16 Ranagalage M, Gunarathna MHJP, Surasinghe TD, Dissanayake D, Simwanda M, Murayama Y, Sathurusinghe A (2020) Multi-decadal forest-cover dynamics in the tropical realm: Past trends and policy insights for forest conservation in dry zone of Sri Lanka. Forests 11(8):836. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11080836 Ratnayake SS, Kariyawasam CS (2007) Conservation and use of wild-harvested medicinal plants in Sri Lanka. Crop wild relative conservation and use. CABI, Wallingford UK, pp 625–631. doi.org/10.1079/9781845930998.0625 Ratnayake SS, Kariyawasam CS, Kumar L, Hunter D, Liyanage ASU (2021) Potential distribution of crop wild relatives under climate change in Sri Lanka: implications for conservation of agricultural biodiversity. Curr Res Environ Sustain 3:100092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100092 Roberts CM, Sexton JO (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344(6187). doi.org/10.1126/science.1246752 Rodrigues AS, Pilgrim JD, Lamoreux JF, Hoffmann M, Brooks TM (2006) The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 21(2):71–76. 10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.010 Sajeevan T, Mondoni A, Wijayasinghe M, Jayasuriya G, Kumarage M, Orsenigo S (2023) Towards a More Efficient In and Ex Situ Conservation of Sri Lankan Wild Rice Species. Plants 12(11):2149. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12112149 The 2007 Red (2007) List of Threatened Fauna and Flora of Sri Lanka. IUCN Sri Lanka Ministry Environ Nat Resour. Xiii + 148pp. The National Red List 2020 - Conservation Status of the Flora of Sri Lanka (2020) Sri Lanka: Biodiversity Secretariat, Ministry of Environment and the National Herbarium, Department of National Botanical Gardens . pp.254 Wake DB, Vredenburg VT (2008) Are we in the midst of the sixth mass extinction? A view from the world of amphibians. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105 (SUPPL. 1), 11466–11473. doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0801921105 Warakagoda PS, Subasinghe S (2015) Studies on seed germination of Coscinium fenestratum (Menispermaceae): a threatened medicinal plant. Int J Minor Fruits Med Aromatic Plants 1(1):37–46 Weragoda PB (1980) The traditional system of medicine in Sri Lanka. J Ethnopharmacol 2(1):71–73. doi.org/10.1016/0378-8741(80)90033-1 Wijesundara DSA (2022) Distribution and Conservation of Endemic Flowering Plants in Sri Lanka. In Proceedings of International Forestry and Environment Symposium, 26 Wilson CD, Roberts D, Reid N (2011) Applying species distribution modeling to identify areas of high conservation value for endangered species: A case study using Margaritifera margaritifera (L). Biol Conserv 144(2):821–829 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Appendix.xlsx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4409027","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":304888188,"identity":"cde97648-3c5b-4460-b872-c5807dbee40d","order_by":0,"name":"C. L. Jayaweera","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Peradeniya","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"C.","middleName":"L.","lastName":"Jayaweera","suffix":""},{"id":304888189,"identity":"6c8bdba2-1b71-413e-90fc-89adb86f88a2","order_by":1,"name":"R. W.M.T.N. Rajakaruna","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Peradeniya","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"R.","middleName":"W.M.T.N.","lastName":"Rajakaruna","suffix":""},{"id":304888190,"identity":"7a612e62-2109-44cf-832e-205eb0b11837","order_by":2,"name":"K. M.G.G. Jayasuriya","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Peradeniya","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"K.","middleName":"M.G.G.","lastName":"Jayasuriya","suffix":""},{"id":304888191,"identity":"63c92bda-db79-4643-a260-4a95acabe7a6","order_by":3,"name":"D. M.D. Yakandawala","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Peradeniya","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"D.","middleName":"M.D.","lastName":"Yakan","suffix":"M.D."}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-05-12 15:31:44","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4409027/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4409027/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":56962418,"identity":"2f2fd6df-5fba-4a7f-b5d9-e322c802f025","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:31:39","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":85565,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe distribution of Threatened Medicinal Plants (TMPs) based on their calculated Protective Status categories, ranging from lower distribution within the Protected Areas to exclusive confinement to protected areas.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/a92cb34705b42b9185b49b8e.png"},{"id":56962420,"identity":"a3500eac-ed54-4f78-9cc1-ec0f4cd63956","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:31:39","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":252932,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThreatened medicinal plants (TMPs) categorized as Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU) in Sri Lanka (The National Red List, 2020)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/aa47889ba1872d4031a3d2c8.png"},{"id":56962423,"identity":"e6c1d625-8664-403a-8891-9df93ebabc16","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:31:39","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":716979,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe richness of the Threatened Medicinal Plants (TMPs) and Protected Areas in Sri Lanka [as listed in Rajakaruna et al. (unpublished data)]\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/80c373ed3472a0af7ca2641c.png"},{"id":56962802,"identity":"f6642cd6-13bd-4ff0-8827-1b28cb296d60","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:47:39","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":586176,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e(a)The\u003cstrong\u003e \u003c/strong\u003eRichness of Threatened Medicinal Plants (TMPs) in Sri Lanka, showcasing TMP richness within the Protected Areas categorized as Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU); (b) Protected Areas with richness of TMPs over 25 (c) Protected Areas with richness of TMPs between 13-20 and (d) Protected Areas with TMPs richness below 3.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig42.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/9414a924f414127326a6930b.png"},{"id":56962563,"identity":"95c46b8b-0a59-4dc9-a83e-bee977715bd6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:39:39","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":390395,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe distribution of Threatened Medicinal Plants (TMPs) in Sri Lanka categorized by their calculated Protective Status. The categories include the number of medicinal plants classified under Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/482f4a4e37979724986729eb.png"},{"id":56962564,"identity":"14bdf8d0-66a3-4a66-8acb-2c29d25c9cb3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:39:39","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":378033,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eOverall distribution and the distribution of Threatened Medicinal Plants (TMPs) within Protected Areas with plant’s Protective Status (PS); (a) Protective Status (PS) Vs total distribution of CR plants (b) Protective Status (PS) Vs distribution in protected areas of CR plants (c) Protective Status (PS) Vs total distribution of EN plants (d) Protective Status (PS) Vs distribution in protected areas of EN plants (e) Protective Status (PS) Vs total distribution of VU plants (f) Protective Status (PS) Vs distribution in protected areas of VU plants. The 100 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, 5000 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e, and 20000 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e reference lines define the Geographic range of Extent of occurrence (EOO) of CR, EN, and VU status provided by The National Red List, 2020.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig62.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/f3a5bb572a69fb732dada785.png"},{"id":56962427,"identity":"ec1e4c68-916d-43ba-9d7c-7d03f7b2a3f1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:31:40","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":732705,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEx-situ \u003c/em\u003econservation status of Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU) medicinal plant species in Sri Lanka\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/72da58361cc5370cac45306f.png"},{"id":56962421,"identity":"63b28c45-7e0d-4ff0-b615-d9bae44bcaec","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:31:39","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":179372,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEx-situ\u003c/em\u003econservation status of Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU) threatened medicinal plant species in Government Medicinal Plant Gardens (MPGs) in Sri Lanka\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Fig8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/0b4e818c78a1c94b5b36de21.png"},{"id":69009359,"identity":"6e6723d3-0cbf-4e6f-a234-05c4693b3e4c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-11-14 13:32:13","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2969873,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/4f04652d-590d-4842-88ff-b401da9ba2e1.pdf"},{"id":56962426,"identity":"3ce8f343-6591-4bff-be9e-f807f3ac073d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-22 18:31:40","extension":"xlsx","order_by":10,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":36558,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix.xlsx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4409027/v1/53a71b6bb19bcf0ff2392b6d.xlsx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Gaps in In-situ and Ex-situ Conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plant Species of Sri Lanka; Towards Their Effective Conservation","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eFlora of Sri Lanka with a diversity of plants with medicinal properties has the potential to alleviate various health problems (Gunawardana and Jayasuriya, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In Sri Lanka, traditional medicine is a major source of primary healthcare for 60\u0026ndash;70% of the rural population, using various plant parts including leaves, roots, fruits, flowers and twigs (Perera, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The World Health Organization reports that the majority of the population in developing countries, including Sri Lanka, rely on traditional medical systems (WHO, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSri Lanka, a country known to be rich in biodiversity, harbors 3087 species of Angiosperms and 926 Bryophytes (The National Red List, 2020), with 1476 species [(Rajakaruna \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., (unpublished data)] recognized for their medicinal value. Due to various threats, at present, 307 medicinal plant species are listed as threatened [(Rajakaruna \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., (unpublished data)]. According to Ratnayake and Kariyawasam, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), approximately 50% of the medicinal plants on the island grow in natural forests, some of which are restricted to particularly unique habitats. Due to the destruction of forests, expansion of traditional medicinal material production, increased demand for raw materials, and lack of organized planting and unscientific exploitation of medicinal plants, certain medicinal plant species are on the verge of extinction (Weragoda, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1980\u003c/span\u003e). While the world faces critical challenges in slowing the accelerated rate of biodiversity loss (Cardinale et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Wake and Vredenburg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), conservationists have increasingly called for conservation efforts to be prioritized (Parr et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Further, it is important to prioritize species for conservation as the number of species threatened with extinction outweighs the resources available for their conservation (Gauthier et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Pimm et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn response to the global biodiversity crisis, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has developed the 'Red List of Threatened Species\u0026rsquo;, a comprehensive framework assessing extinction risk and species distribution (Pollock et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Brooks et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). Species are classified into threat categories; Extinct (EX), Extinct in the wild (EW), Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU), Near Threatened (NT), Least Concern (LC) and Data Deficient (DD) through assessment against quantitative criteria based on indicators of extinction risk (Collen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Hammer and Khoshbakht \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). With urgency, countries around the world, including Sri Lanka, are incorporating IUCN criteria into their conservation policies and multilateral agreements (Maxted et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e; Rodrigues et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecognizing the urgency of conservation and gaps in data, the present study focuses on the application of Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to identify the gaps in \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plants (TMPs) of Sri Lanka. Information needs for biodiversity conservation are many and varied, and the state of knowledge is often unsatisfactory to make appropriate assessments (Heywood, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). The existing information and available methods for obtaining the best conservation strategy for different plant species should be integrated. Responding to this need, our research integrates Geographic Information System (GIS) technology for generating data related to the protected aspects of conservation. Remote sensing (RS) imagery GIS layers are used as predictors in the analysis of vegetation and modeling (Goodchild et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e; Dirnb\u0026ouml;ck et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). The latest advances in RS technologies strengthen its use in capturing measurements of biodiversity on earth and in addressing \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e biodiversity conservation efforts by adding value to the detection of species, ecological communities and patterns of species richness (Prasad et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResponding to this requirement, our research integrates GIS technology for evaluating the priorities related to distribution for high-priority TMPs, habitat protection needs of TMPs in \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation and, needs for establishing \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation. To achieve this goal, identifying and prioritizing medicinal plant species and areas for conservation are essential preliminary steps toward establishing effective \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e and developing \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation practices. These steps are crucial for planning effective conservation strategies and policy development. In Sri Lanka, protected areas are defined as clearly demarcated geographical spaces managed by either the Departments of Forest Conservation or Wildlife Conservation, aimed at achieving the long-term conservation of nature and associated ecosystem services and cultural values. These protected areas include Strict Nature Reserves, Forest Reserves, Forest Corridors, National Parks, and Sanctuaries, and are legally protected to varying extents to prevent encroachment and exploitation of forest resources and wildlife. They play a crucial role in safeguarding Sri Lanka\u0026rsquo;s natural heritage and are managed through legal or other effective means to ensure their conservation. Thus, wild species in a protected area are more protected from anthropogenic threats (Sajeevan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, seed banks play an important role in conservation efforts by preserving the genetic diversity of plant species while ensuring their survival in the face of environmental challenges and threats such as habitat degradation and climate change. Further, they are an invaluable resource for research, restoration, and sustainable use of plant biodiversity. The goal of gap analysis is to evaluate all ecosystems, determine areas rich in medicinal plant species diversity, and assess whether these species-rich areas are adequately represented in protected areas. Areas identified as important via the gap analysis can then be examined more closely for their biological qualities and management needs. The level of species rich areas outside the protected areas system needs to be taken into account in future national conservation planning. According to Ratnayake et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) Sri Lankan medicinal plant species are under threat due to future climate change projections and suggests that their conservation in existing habitats and \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation methods are crucial. A comprehensive collection of distribution data of medicinal plant species is available in the literature, the National herbarium of Sri Lanka, and the Government Institutes. However, species distribution data are not scattered and there are no studies available that have identified high-priority species based on their conservation status and areas for conservation of medicinal plant species. Therefore, the specific objectives include: (a) producing a distribution map of TMPs in Sri Lanka, and (b) investigating the proportion of TMP populations located inside and outside existing protected areas. This information is used to identify new high-priority areas for \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation and to determine species that are not yet represented in \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e seed banks.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eIn-situ\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003econservation status of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDistribution data of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe list of the TMPs in Sri Lanka was sourced from Rajakaruna \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., (unpublished data), GPS coordinates of the TMPs were obtained from recent scientific literature (from 1999 to 2022), The Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon and from the herbarium specimens located in National Herbarium, Royal Botanic Gardens, Peradeniya. The total TMPs recorded were georeferenced and organized in ArcGIS 10.4 (Esri, 380 New York CA 92373\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;8100) according to the forest and Divisional Secretary's Divisions (DSDs). However, this might overestimate the distribution of certain plant species due to the lack of exact distribution points. We assume that this provides the most possibly accurate distribution based on the available data.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDetermination of priority areas for conservation based on threatened medicinal plant richness\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo determine the areas of species richness, the georeferenced data of the TMPs were merged into a single map using ArcGIS software. The richness of TMPs in each protected areas was calculated by aggregating individual plant distribution presence-absence data within protected areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDetermination of priority species for conservation based on Protective Status of threatened medicinal plants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe protected area map of Sri Lanka was obtained from the literature (Sajeevan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The total distribution of a plant species within the island and the distribution within the protected areas was calculated separately using ArcGIS. By employing these figures, the protective status for each species was calculated with the equation below;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eProtective Status (PS)\u0026thinsp;=\u003c/b\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u003cspan type=\"BoldUnderline\" class=\"BoldUnderline\" name=\"Emphasis\"\u003ePlant distribution in protected areas (PA)\u003c/span\u003e \u003cb\u003eX 100%\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePlant total distribution\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe distribution of TMPs based on their calculated protective status was categorized into four categories as indicated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor plant species with 0% protective status, it indicates a lack of distribution of the TMPs within protected areas. A protective status in the range of 0%-50% was considered to indicate a lower distribution, while a protective status in the range of 50%-75% was considered as moderate. A protective status between 75%-95% was considered of higher distribution, and a protective status of 95%-100% indicates that the plant is exclusively confined to protected areas (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eEx-Situ\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003econservation status of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation of TMPs in Sri Lanka was investigated in the following Government Medicinal Plant Gardens (MPG): The Bandaranaike Memorial Ayurvedic Research Institute (BMARI); Research and Extension Services National Herbal Gardens in Haldummulla, Girandurukotte, Pallekele, Pattipola, and Pinnaduwa; and Ganewatta Medicinal Plant Garden. Locations that were obtained from the MPGs were compared against the total distribution of a plant species within the island which was in turn used to calculate the percentage of TMP populations stored in \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e collections.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results \u0026 Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDistribution of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the present study, updated distribution maps of TMPs in Sri Lanka were created using a comprehensive dataset comprising, a total of 284 geographical distribution data of TMPs among 307 TMPs (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) from the scientific literature (2022), The National Herbarium, and The Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon. This is an important initial step in conserving and monitoring the existing TMP populations, as existing data are outdated and scattered. It is worth noting that only 284 TMP distributions were found out of 307 TMPs due to potential unrecorded occurrences. Each TMP was designated an acronym for easy reference (Appendix 1).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePriority areas for conservation based on threatened medicinal plants richness\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe distribution of Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU) medicinal plant species in Sri Lanka across its 65,569 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e is noteworthy (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Accordingly, these species represent proportions of 13%, 41%, and 65%, respectively of the whole land area of the island, contributing significantly to the understanding of Sri Lanka's diverse and ecologically significant flora. TMPs are distributed within 70% of the total land area of the country. In the context of protective status, where conservation efforts are concentrated, specifically, within protected areas, CR TMPs constitute 27% of their total distribution, while EN and VU TMPs account for 23% and 20% respectively, when considering their respective total distributions. It underscores the urgent need to broaden the conservation efforts beyond protected areas to encompass a more comprehensive approach.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccordingly, the study highlights the vulnerability of these TMPs as their distribution within the protected areas is very low. Larger protected areas such as Peak Wilderness Sanctuary and Sinharaja Forest Reserve, have different richness values with plant\u0026rsquo;s local distribution. Altogether protected areas have higher plant richness than the average richness values that are shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePriority species for conservation based on Protective Status of threatened medicinal plants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe term \u0026lsquo;protective status\u0026rsquo; denotes the proportion of protected area relative to the total medicinal plant distribution. Specifically, a lower protective status suggests a lower distribution of TMP within protected areas, accompanied by a more extensive dispersion beyond these specified zones. Conversely, a higher protective status correlates with an augmented concentration of TMP distribution within protected areas or strict confinement to such designated regions (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is crucial to recognize that TMP distribution may vary from higher to lower. Therefore, assessing the area of overall distribution is essential for determining their conservation status. The conservation status of these species should take into account not only their presence in protected areas but also the broader context of their distribution to develop a more comprehensive understanding of their conservation needs and challenges.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is important to note that some plant species share the same protective status value but exhibit significantly different distributions. Therefore, when evaluating a plant species, the plant's total distribution as well as its distribution within the protected areas independently and individually should be taken into account (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e illustrates the distribution of TMPs in relation to their respective protective status. Both the overall distribution and the distribution within protected areas have been graphed, as protective status is a ratio derived from these values.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen examining CR TMPs (29 plants), 76% of them are located in areas characterized by low protective status, 14% in those with moderate protective status, and 10% in areas with higher protective status (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). \u003cem\u003eMadhuca clavata\u003c/em\u003e (C16) and \u003cem\u003eOlea paniculata\u003c/em\u003e (C20) are confined to protected areas with potential distributions spanning 101.5 km\u0026sup2; and 0.1 km\u0026sup2; respectively. Despite both having a protective status of 100%, distribution of C16 surpasses that of C20, as illustrated in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e(a) and 6(b). On the other hand, \u003cem\u003eXylocarpus rumphii\u003c/em\u003e (C29) exhibits the highest distribution among CR plants covering 1700 Km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e. Additionally, \u003cem\u003eNymphoides aurantiaca\u003c/em\u003e (C18) exhibits a protective status of 0% with a distribution spanning 117 km\u0026sup2;, while C16 showcases a protective status of 100% and a distribution of 101.5 km\u0026sup2;. This suggests that while their distributions may appear similar, their protective status can vary due to their confinement within protected areas, as depicted in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e(a) and 6(b).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsidering the TMPs under the EN category (102 plants), 82% are found with low protective status, 8% with moderate protective status, and 10% with higher protective status. \u003cem\u003eBalanophora fungosa\u003c/em\u003e (E7), \u003cem\u003eCalamus zeylanicus\u003c/em\u003e (E15), \u003cem\u003eDiospyros atrata\u003c/em\u003e (E32), \u003cem\u003eDiospyros oppositifolia\u003c/em\u003e (E34), \u003cem\u003eGardenia crameri\u003c/em\u003e (E45), and \u003cem\u003eLoeseneriella macrantha\u003c/em\u003e (E64) are restricted to protected areas. The distributions of \u003cem\u003eLoeseneriella macrantha\u003c/em\u003e (E64), \u003cem\u003eBalanophora fungosa\u003c/em\u003e (E7), \u003cem\u003eDiospyros atrata\u003c/em\u003e (E32), \u003cem\u003eGardenia crameri\u003c/em\u003e (E45), \u003cem\u003eCalamus zeylanicus\u003c/em\u003e (E15), and \u003cem\u003eDiospyros oppositifolia\u003c/em\u003e (E34) span 1657 km\u0026sup2;, 454 km\u0026sup2;, 315 km\u0026sup2;, 188.5 km\u0026sup2;, 179.5 km\u0026sup2;, and 9 km\u0026sup2; respectively, indicating that even with equal protective status, total distributions may vary [(Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e(c) and 6(d)]. This discrepancy explains the complexity of conservation dynamics, wherein even within the confines of protected areas, species' habitat preferences and ecological niches play crucial roles in determining their distribution ranges. Furthermore, \u003cem\u003eMunronia pinnata\u003c/em\u003e (E71) boasts the highest distribution of 6343 km\u0026sup2; with a protective status of 26.8%, indicating that despite its extensive distribution, it receives relatively less protection within protected areas [(Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e(c) and 6(d)]. This suggests the need for more effective conservation strategies tailored to address the specific ecological requirements and threats faced by individual species. Another comparison is between \u003cem\u003eMemecylon hookeri\u003c/em\u003e (E69) with a protective status of 0% and \u003cem\u003eDiospyros oppositifolia\u003c/em\u003e (E34), with a protective status of 100%; despite this contrast, their distributions are somewhat similar, spanning 23 km\u0026sup2; and 9 km\u0026sup2; respectively. This complexity necessitates plans to conservation, taking into account not only protective status but also factors like habitat fragmentation, anthropogenic pressures, and climate change impacts, to ensure the long-term survival of TMPs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsidering the TMPs under the VU category (153 plants), 88% are located in areas characterized by low protective status, 8% in those with moderate protective status, and 4% in areas with higher protective status. \u003cem\u003eAsparagus gonoclados\u003c/em\u003e (V23), \u003cem\u003ePalaquium thwaitesii\u003c/em\u003e (V116), \u003cem\u003eSemecarpus subpeltata\u003c/em\u003e (V131), and \u003cem\u003eTinospora sinensis\u003c/em\u003e (V146) are restricted to protected areas with respective distributions of 345 km\u0026sup2;, 277 km\u0026sup2;, 254 km\u0026sup2;, and 27 km\u0026sup2; [Figure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e(e) and 6(f)]. V146, despite having a protective status of 100%, exhibits a relatively smaller distribution of 27 km\u0026sup2;. In contrast, \u003cem\u003eCinnamomum verum\u003c/em\u003e (V45) claims a distribution of 39 km\u0026sup2; despite having a protective status of 0%. Therefore, comprehensive monitoring and research are essential to better understand the drivers of species distribution and to inform adaptive management strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe species richness is a fundamental measurement of community and regional diversity that underlies ecological models and conservation strategies. Highlighting the importance such analysis, the present study revealed that the distribution of TMP richness in Sri Lanka is not uniform (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). This is not surprising as when considering the distribution of whole angiosperm flora, higher species richness is recorded in the Central and South West Region of Sri Lanka (Gunatilleke et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Wijesundara, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Protected areas with high species richness include Sinharaja rainforest, Peak Wilderness Sanctuary (Sri Padaya), Hantana mountain range, Elahera forest reserve, and Knuckles forest reserve each harboring over 50 TMPs (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Among the mapped 205 protected areas housing TMPs, over 50%, specifically 121 areas, support less than 10 TMPs. In such instances, an efficient conservation strategy could involve expanding the existing protected areas. This approach has demonstrated its significance as a cost-effective method to safeguard threatened species, requiring fewer resources compared to the establishment of new protected areas. This is not only applicable to TMPs but also other important plants species where Sajeevan et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) also suggesting enlarging the protected areas would be effective for including populations in the periphery of protected areas for more effective conservation of crop wild relatives such as rice.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite relying on protected areas as the primary strategy for conserving threatened species, many countries face challenges as these areas alone may not be sufficient. In many instances, threatened species continue on a trajectory toward extinction. All countries need to recognize the need for targeted \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e species conservation and invest much greater effort and resources in the recovery of threatened or other important species. Even in countries with well-developed recovery programs, many action plans for species recovery remain to be completed or even implemented in a timely manner (Dorey and Walker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe categorization of Sri Lanka as a global biodiversity hotspot not only indicates that the country contains an exceptionally high number of unique plant and animal species, but also that at least 75% of the natural habitats that these species inhabit have already been lost (Cincotta et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). Sri Lanka\u0026rsquo;s forest cover has depleted to 29.2% over the past years (Premakantha et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Despite the establishment of protected areas by the Sri Lankan Government over the past 100 years, rapid forest losses have been recorded in the recent decades (Ranagalage et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, to ensure the survival of these threatened species, \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation measures should be implemented.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eEx-Situ\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eConservation status of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWith the practical difficulties in expanding the protected areas we strongly recommend the proper implementation of the \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation as only around 28.34% of the 307 TMPs are represented in \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e collections maintained under the Government. The Government MPGs collectively house 24% of CR TMPs, 28% of EN TMPs, and 30% of VU TMPs (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). These statistics underscore a significant gap in ex-situ conservation efforts for TMPs in Sri Lanka. The results show that Pinnaduwa MPG is the richest \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation site and contains the highest priority taxa for \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). The geographic distribution of most of those TMPs with \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e collections was low when compared to their distribution of \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e range. \u003cem\u003eEx-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation is not always sharply separated from \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation, but it is an effective complement to it, especially for those overexploited and endangered medicinal plants with slow growth, low abundance, and high susceptibility to replanting diseases. \u003cem\u003eEx-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation aims to cultivate and naturalize threatened species to ensure their continued survival and sometimes to produce large quantities of planting material used in the creation of drugs, and it is often an immediate action taken to sustain medicinal plant resources. Many species of previously wild medicinal plants can not only retain high potency when grown in gardens far away from the habitats where they naturally occur, but can also have their reproductive materials selected and stored in seed banks for future replanting. Unfortunately, there are no seed banks storing Sri Lankan medicinal plant species. The only seed bank occurs in Sri Lanka, is the seed bank at the Plant Genetic Resources Center at Gannoruwa which only stores seeds of crop and crop wild relative species (Ganashan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e). Given the limited research conducted on medicinal plants in Sri Lanka such as Warakagoda \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2015, Fonseka et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, and Jayawardhane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e, further exploration and studies should be conducted.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe present study highlights the critical status of TMPs in Sri Lanka, emphasizing the urgency for conservation efforts. The distribution and protective status analysis reveals significant challenges, with many species exhibiting low distribution within protected areas and facing potential threats. While existing protected areas play a crucial role, they alone may not be sufficient to protect these species. Therefore, a comprehensive approach integrating both \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation strategies is imperative. Our findings suggest the importance of expanding protected areas, especially in regions with high TMP richness, as a cost-effective conservation measure. Moreover, the establishment of seed banks specifically for TMPs is essential for long-term conservation efforts. Despite these recommendations, challenges persist, including limited resources for conservation initiatives and incomplete implementation of recovery plans. As such, concerted efforts are needed to address these limitations and ensure the preservation of Sri Lanka's rich biodiversity heritage for future generations. One of the primary challenges hindering the conservation of TMPs in Sri Lanka is the limited recording of species occurrences. Without comprehensive and accurate data on species distribution and habitat preferences, it becomes exceedingly difficult to devise effective conservation strategies. To conserve TMPs effectively, it is imperative to have precise location information, enabling targeted conservation efforts in areas where these species are most vulnerable. Therefore, there is an urgent need to prioritize the collection of detailed location data for TMPs, ensuring that conservation efforts are directed towards areas where they are most needed. Addressing this challenge and improving data collection efforts are essential steps towards ensuring the long-term survival of TMPs in Sri Lanka.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, this study highlighted important insights into the conservation status of TMPs in Sri Lanka, addressing key factors such as distribution, priority areas for conservation, and the significance of \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation efforts. The richness of TMPs is primarily concentrated in the Central and South West Region of Sri Lanka, emphasizing the importance of targeted areas for conservation. The significance of protected areas such as Sinharaja rainforest, Peak Wilderness Sanctuary, and etc., hosting over 50 TMPs, were identified. Approximately only 28.34% of the 307 TMPs are present in \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e collections. It recommends the expansion of existing protected areas to ensure the protection of diverse plant populations especially in regions with lower TMP richness. The paper advocates increased efforts and resources to recover TMPs, acknowledging the challenges faced by protected areas alone. The integration of GIS technology, combined with distribution mapping and prioritization strategies, provides stakeholders and policy makers with a valuable tool for making informed decisions to safeguard the rich biodiversity of medicinal plant species in the country.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eRWMTNR and CLJ participated in writing the original draft of the manuscript, data analysis, and generating the figures. All authors contributed to the study conception, methodology, design, and visualization. CLJ generated detailed maps and detailed graphs. RWMTNR, DMDY, and KMGGJ participated in data collection. KMGGJ and DMDY contributed to the editing and reviewing of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe would like to express our gratitude for the support of Mr. W.P. Wanigasinghe of the Department of Forest Conservation of Sri Lanka, Dr. Dammika Abeygunawardana of the Department of Ayurveda of Sri Lanka, the Department of National Botanic Gardens of Sri Lanka, The Bandaranaike Memorial Ayurvedic Research Institute (BMARI), Sri Lanka, Research and Extension Services National Herbal Gardens in Haldummulla, Girandurukotte, Pallekele, Pattipola, and Pinnaduwa, Sri Lanka, and Ganewatta Medicinal Plant Garden in Sri Lanka.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrooks TM, Bakarr MI, Boucher T, Fonseca GABD, Hilton-Taylor C, Hoekstra JM, Moritz T, Olivieri S, Parrish J, Pressey RL, Rodrigues ASL, Sechrest W, Stattersfield A, Strahm W, Stuart SN (2004) Coverage Provided by the Global Protected-Area System: Is It Enough? \u003cem\u003eBioScience, 54\u003c/em\u003e(12), 1081\u0026ndash;1091\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003edoi.org/ 10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[1081:CPBTGP]2.0.CO;2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCardinale BJ, Duffy JE, Gonzalez A, Hooper DU, Perrings C, Venail P, Narwani A, MacE GM, Tilman D, Wardle DA, Kinzig AP, Daily GC, Loreau M, Grace JB, Larigauderie A, Srivastava DS, Naeem S (2012) Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486(7401):59\u0026ndash;67. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1038/nature11148\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/nature11148\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCincotta RP, Wisnewski J, Engelman R (2000) Human population in the biodiversity hotspots. Nature 404(6781):990\u0026ndash;992\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCollen B, Dulvy NK, Gaston KJ, G\u0026auml;rdenfors U, Keith DA, Punt AE, Regan HM, B\u0026ouml;hm M, Hedges S, Seddon M, Butchart SHM, Hilton-Taylor C, Hoffmann M, Bachman SP, Ak\u0026ccedil;akaya HR (2016) Clarifying misconceptions of extinction risk assessment with the IUCN Red List. Biol Lett 12(4). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2015.0843\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1098/rsbl.2015.0843\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDassanayake MD, Clayton WD (eds) (1996\u0026ndash;2000) \u003cem\u003eA Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon, Volumes X-XIV.\u003c/em\u003e Oxford \u0026amp; IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. New Delhi\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDassanayake MD, Fosberg FR, Clayton WD (eds) (1994) A Revised Hand-book to the Flora of Ceylon, Volume XIII. Oxford \u0026amp; IBH Publishing Co. Pvt, New Delhi\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDassanayake MD, Fosberg FR, Clayton WD (eds) (1995) A Revised Hand- book to the Flora of Ceylon, Volume IX. Amerind Publishing Co. Pvt, New Delhi\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDassanayake MD, Fosberg FR (eds) (1980\u0026ndash;1991). \u003cem\u003eA Revised Handbook to the Flora of Ceylon, Volumes I-VII\u003c/em\u003e. Amerind Publishing Co. Pvt. New Delhi\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDirnb\u0026ouml;ck T, Dullinger S, Grabherr G (2003) A regional impact assessment of climate and land-use change on alpine vegetation. J Biogeogr 30(3):401\u0026ndash;417. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2699.2003.00839.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1046/j.1365-2699.2003.00839.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDorey K, Walker TR (2018) Limitations of threatened species lists in Canada: a federal and provincial perspective. Biol Conserv 217:259\u0026ndash;268. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.11.018\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biocon.2017.11.018\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFonseka DLCK, Wickramaarachchi WWUI, Madushani RPS (2019) Synthetic seed production as a tool for the conservation and domestication of Celastrus paniculatus: a rare medicinal plant. Annual Res Rev Biology 32(4):1\u0026ndash;8. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.9734/arrb/2019/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.9734/arrb/2019/\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGanashan P, Balendira S, Dassanayake MD (1995) Country Report to the FAO International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources. Available online at \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/PGR/SoW1/asia/SRILANKA.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/PGR/SoW1/asia/SRILANKA.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed on 19/02/2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGauthier P, Debussche M, Thompson JD (2010) Regional priority setting for rare species based on a method combining three criteria. Biol Conserv 143(6):1501\u0026ndash;1509. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.03.032\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.biocon.2010.03.032\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoodchild MF, Steyaert LT, Parks BO (1993) GIS and environmental modeling. GIS World Books, Fort Collins\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGunatilleke N, Pethiyagoda R, Gunatilleke S (2008) Biodiversity of Sri Lanka. J Natl Foundation Sri Lanka 36:25\u0026ndash;62. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4038/jnsfsr.v36i0.8047\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4038/jnsfsr.v36i0.8047\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGunawardana SLA, Jayasuriya WJABN (2019) Medicinally important herbal flowers in Sri Lanka. \u003cem\u003eEvidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1155/2019/2321961\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1155/2019/2321961\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHammer K, Khoshbakht K (2005) Towards a \u0026lsquo;Red List\u0026rsquo; for crop plant species. Genet Resour Crop Evol 52:249\u0026ndash;265. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-004-7550-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10722-004-7550-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHeywood VH (1997) Information needs in biodiversity assessments-from genes to ecosystems. Biodiversity information: needs and options. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the 1996 International Workshop on Biodiversity Information, held in London, UK\u003c/em\u003e, 5\u0026ndash;20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJayawardhane J, Damunupola JW, Jayasuriya KMGG (2021) Propagation of three important medicinal plants in Aacanthaceae; Andrographis paniculata, Barleria prionitis and Rhinacanthus polonnaruwensis. Ceylon J Sci 50(2):129\u0026ndash;137. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://doi.org/10.4038/cjs.v50i2.7874\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4038/cjs.v50i2.7874\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaxted N, Hawkes JG, Guarino L, Sawkins M (1997) Towards the selection of taxa for plant genetic conservation. Genet Resour Crop Evol 44:337\u0026ndash;348\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParr CL, Woinarski JCZ, Pienaar DJ (2009) Cornerstones of biodiversity conservation? Comparing the management effectiveness of Kruger and Kakadu National Parks, two key savanna reserves. Biodivers Conserv 18(13):3643\u0026ndash;3662. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9669-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10531-009-9669-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePerera PK (2012) Current Scenario of Ayurveda and Traditional Medicine in Sri Lanka. 4th Herbal International Summit-Cum-Exhibition on Medicinal, Aromatic Products, Spices and Finished Products. Available online at\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ehttps://\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.researchgate.net/publication/224771841_Current_scenario_of_herbal_medicine_in_Sri_Lanka\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed on 20th January 2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePimm SL, Jenkins CN, Abell R, Brooks TM, Gittleman JL, Joppa LN, Raven PH, Roberts CM, Sexton JO (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344(6187). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1126/science.1246752\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/science.1246752\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePollock C, Mace GM, Hilton-Taylor C, de Iongh HH, B\u0026aacute;nki OS, Bergmans W (2003) \u0026amp; van der Werff ten Bosch, M. J. The revised IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, Version 3.1. \u003cem\u003eThe Harmonization of Red Lists for Threatened Species in Europe. Leiden (The Netherlands): The Netherlands Commission for International Nature Protection\u003c/em\u003e, 33\u0026ndash;48\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePrasad N, Semwal M, Roy PS (2015) Remote sensing and GIS for biodiversity conservation. Recent Adv Lichenology: Mod Methods Approaches Biomonitoring Bioprospection 1:151\u0026ndash;179\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePremakantha KT, Chandani RPDS, Kingsly SAD, Dias HU, Kekulandara, N.S.B (2021) Forest cover assessment in Sri Lanka using high resolution satellite images. Sri Lanka Forester 40:1\u0026ndash;16\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRanagalage M, Gunarathna MHJP, Surasinghe TD, Dissanayake D, Simwanda M, Murayama Y, Sathurusinghe A (2020) Multi-decadal forest-cover dynamics in the tropical realm: Past trends and policy insights for forest conservation in dry zone of Sri Lanka. Forests 11(8):836. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/f11080836\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/f11080836\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRatnayake SS, Kariyawasam CS (2007) Conservation and use of wild-harvested medicinal plants in Sri Lanka. Crop wild relative conservation and use. CABI, Wallingford UK, pp 625\u0026ndash;631. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1079/9781845930998.0625\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1079/9781845930998.0625\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRatnayake SS, Kariyawasam CS, Kumar L, Hunter D, Liyanage ASU (2021) Potential distribution of crop wild relatives under climate change in Sri Lanka: implications for conservation of agricultural biodiversity. Curr Res Environ Sustain 3:100092. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100092\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100092\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoberts CM, Sexton JO (2014) The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344(6187). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1126/science.1246752\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1126/science.1246752\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRodrigues AS, Pilgrim JD, Lamoreux JF, Hoffmann M, Brooks TM (2006) The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 21(2):71\u0026ndash;76. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.010\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSajeevan T, Mondoni A, Wijayasinghe M, Jayasuriya G, Kumarage M, Orsenigo S (2023) Towards a More Efficient In and Ex Situ Conservation of Sri Lankan Wild Rice Species. Plants 12(11):2149. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/plants12112149\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/plants12112149\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThe 2007 Red (2007) List of Threatened Fauna and Flora of Sri Lanka. IUCN Sri Lanka Ministry Environ Nat Resour. Xiii\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;148pp.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThe National Red List 2020 - Conservation Status of the Flora of Sri Lanka (2020) Sri Lanka: \u003cem\u003eBiodiversity Secretariat, Ministry of Environment and the National Herbarium, Department of National Botanical Gardens\u003c/em\u003e. pp.254\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWake DB, Vredenburg VT (2008) Are we in the midst of the sixth mass extinction? A view from the world of amphibians. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105\u003c/em\u003e(SUPPL. 1), 11466\u0026ndash;11473. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1073/pnas.0801921105\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1073/pnas.0801921105\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWarakagoda PS, Subasinghe S (2015) Studies on seed germination of Coscinium fenestratum (Menispermaceae): a threatened medicinal plant. Int J Minor Fruits Med Aromatic Plants 1(1):37\u0026ndash;46\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWeragoda PB (1980) The traditional system of medicine in Sri Lanka. J Ethnopharmacol 2(1):71\u0026ndash;73. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edoi.org/10.1016/0378-8741(80)90033-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/0378-8741(80)90033-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWijesundara DSA (2022) Distribution and Conservation of Endemic Flowering Plants in Sri Lanka. \u003cem\u003eIn Proceedings of International Forestry and Environment Symposium, 26\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilson CD, Roberts D, Reid N (2011) Applying species distribution modeling to identify areas of high conservation value for endangered species: A case study using Margaritifera margaritifera (L). Biol Conserv 144(2):821\u0026ndash;829\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Threatened medicinal plants, Conservation strategies, Geographic Information System (GIS), Distribution maps","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4409027/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4409027/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eSri Lanka is a country rich in biodiversity, harboring 1476 plant species with medicinal values, 307 of which are threatened. These medicinal plants have long been a valuable resource in traditional medicine, reflecting a well-documented historical legacy. However, the fact that 20% of these medicinal plants are listed as threatened poses a major conservation challenge. This study addresses the need for effective conservation strategies for threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka. The study focuses on using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to monitor the distribution of threatened medicinal plants in Sri Lanka, prioritizing the species and areas for conservation and needs for \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation. Using comprehensive datasets on the distribution of threatened medicinal plants from scientific literature, institutes, and herbarium collections, we assessed the priority areas within existing protected areas for \u003cem\u003ein-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation and \u003cem\u003eex-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation status in Government Medicinal Plant Gardens. The research highlights the significance of Sinharaja rainforest and Peak Wilderness Sanctuary (Sri Padaya) as important protected areas with high species richness, housing 68 and 83 threatened medicinal plants respectively. Our findings show that a substantial proportion of threatened medicinal plants are distributed outside of protected areas, highlighting the need of establishing new protected areas as well as expanding the existing protected areas to conserve these unprotected threatened medicinal plants. \u003cem\u003eEx-situ\u003c/em\u003e conservation efforts were found to be crucial, especially for overexploited and endangered species. Our study highlights the importance of integrating GIS technology into conservation management to ensure the effective conservation of Sri Lankan medicinal plants for future generations.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Gaps in In-situ and Ex-situ Conservation of Threatened Medicinal Plant Species of Sri Lanka; Towards Their Effective Conservation","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-05-22 18:31:35","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4409027/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"750c3f21-4eb0-4f66-9da2-b53f91eaed49","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 22nd, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-11-14T13:24:00+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-05-22 18:31:35","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4409027","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4409027","identity":"rs-4409027","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}