1. Botanical name |
Piper peepuloides Roxb. |
|
|||||||||||
2. Synonym(s) |
Nil |
|
|||||||||||
3. Family |
Piperaceae |
|
|||||||||||
4. Taxonomic status |
Species |
|
|||||||||||
5. Vernacular name(s) |
Pipli (Assam); Pahare Pipala (Nepal) |
|
|||||||||||
6. Habit |
Small climbing shrub |
|
|||||||||||
7. Habitat |
Tropical & subtropical evergreen forest. |
|
|||||||||||
8. Original global distribution |
India (Assam, Arunachal, Meghalaya & Sikkim), Bhutan |
|
|||||||||||
9. Current regional
distribution |
Ar. Pradesh |
Namdapha, Nechiphu (West Kameng) |
|
||||||||||
Assam |
Kaziranga, Manas |
|
|||||||||||
Meghalaya |
Khasi & Lugai hill |
|
|||||||||||
Sikkim |
East & North sikkim |
|
|||||||||||
10. Elevation range
(m) |
700 - 1,500 |
|
|||||||||||
11. Population
reduction -PR (Pl. tick appropriate box & refer page 18 of briefing
book) |
States \ Class |
< 30 % |
30 to < 49 % |
50 to < 80 % |
≥ 80 % |
|
|||||||
Ar. Pradesh |
|
ü |
|
|
|
||||||||
Assam |
|
ü |
|
|
|
||||||||
Meghalaya |
|
ü |
|
|
|
||||||||
Sikkim |
|
ü |
|
|
|
||||||||
Data quality |
2, 3 & 4 |
|
|||||||||||
11 a. Time/Rate
(years/generations) |
10 years |
|
|||||||||||
12. Extent of Occurrence – EOO |
> 20,000 Km2 |
|
|||||||||||
13. Area of Occupancy – AOO |
< 450 Km2 (< 100 sq.km in Arunachal Pradesh; 50 sq.km. in Assam; 200 sq.km. in Meghalaya & < 100 sq.km. iN. Sikkim) |
|
|||||||||||
14. No. of locations/sub-populations |
Ar. Pradesh |
Assam |
Meghalaya |
Sikkim |
|
||||||||
2 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
|
|||||||||
14 a. Data quality |
2, 3 & 4 |
|
|||||||||||
15. Threats |
Tp= Traded for parts, L= Habitat destruction, extensive collection for trade |
|
|||||||||||
16. Trade (Pl. refer page no. 8 of briefing book) |
Name(s) |
Pipla |
|||||||||||
Level(s) |
Local ü |
Regional ü |
National ü |
Global |
|||||||||
Parts traded |
Fruiting spike |
||||||||||||
Impact on population |
Declining |
||||||||||||
Data quality |
2, 3 & 4 |
||||||||||||
17. Other comments (Taxonomical, ecological, anthropological, etc.) |
§ Closely related to P. longum in its fruiting spike. § Due to dioecious nature the regeneration rate is low. § Local people use the plant for traditional medicine. § Fruits commonly used as substitute for ayurvedic Pipli (P. longum) |
||||||||||||
18. Recent field
studies (Name, Locality & Year) |
§ Grierson & Long. 1984. Bhutan & Sikkim § Gajurel. 2002. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Arunachal Pradesh |
||||||||||||
19. Status |
Ar. Pradesh |
Assam |
Meghalaya |
Sikkim |
|||||||||
- CITES |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
- Legislation (National/State) |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
- Criteria based on |
A 2 c, d |
A 2 c, d |
A 2 c, d |
A 2 c, d |
|||||||||
- IUCN |
VU (G) |
||||||||||||
20. % of global
presence |
10 % |
15 % |
20 % |
20 % |
|||||||||
|
|
|
50-70 |
||||||||||
21. Existing
conservation measures |
- |
||||||||||||
22. Is the presence of taxon continuous with neighbouring areas? |
Yes, Bhutan |
||||||||||||
23. Are the outside populations perceived to be under similar threats / pressures? |
Not known |
||||||||||||
24. Recommendations (pl. refer page nos. 9 & 10 of briefing book) a) Research/Management i) in situ ii) ex situ b) Cultivation c) Level of difficulty in propagation / cultivation |
Ex situ conservation in botanical gardens Cultivation recommended 1 (Least difficult, can be easily propagated by vegetative methods) |
||||||||||||
25. Existing cultivation |
|
||||||||||||
26. Previous assessment |
Nil- |
||||||||||||
27. Data Sources (including
literature) |
§ Hooker. 1886. Fl. British India. Vol.5 § Kanjilal et. al. 1940. Fl. Assam. Vol. 4 § Grieram & Long. 1884. Fl. Bhutan § Gajurel P.R. 2002. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, NEHU, Shillong. |
||||||||||||
28. Compilers |
R. R. Rao (Facilitator), K. Haridasan, A.N. Rao, R.C. Sundriyal, P. Gajurel, Mridul Goswami, R. Vijaya Sankar (Recorder), R.S. Pathak, G.A. Kinhal. |
||||||||||||
29. Reviewers |
S.N. Hegde (Facilitator), L.R. Bhuyan, Manju Sundriyal, K. Ravikumar (Recorder), M.S. Rawat, M. Majumdar, K.C. Malakar, A. K Baishya, D.K. Ved. |
||||||||||||