Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Global Ecology and Conservation

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/gecco

Gap analysis of Indonesian priority medicinal plant species as

part of their conservation planning
Ria Cahyaningsih a, b, *, Joana Magos Brehm a, Nigel Maxted a
a
School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK
b
Bogor Botanic Gardens, Indonesian Institute of Sciences, Indonesia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Indonesia is a country rich in medicinal plant biodiversity. The conservation and sus-
Received 26 August 2020 tainable use of such species in Indonesia are critical because of incipient population
Received in revised form 9 January 2021 growth, changing land usage, forest clearance, and climate change in a country where most
Accepted 9 January 2021
of the population depends on traditional medicines for their health care and wellbeing.
Identifying the conservation gap is crucial for planning the genetic conservation of Indo-
Keywords:
nesian priority medicinal plant species. These are native plants with limited distribution,
Conservation
wild harvested (often to destruction) and/or included on the IUCN Red List, CITES
Gap analysis
Indonesia
appendices, and national legislation. Ecogeographic data were collated from online data-
Medicinal plant species base, herbarium specimens and living collections and then subjected to in situ and ex situ
gap analysis. The results of this gap analysis support our recommendation that in situ
active conservation reserves for priority plants be established in areas of Indonesia with
the greatest diversity of species. Medicinal plant species with no occurrence points in
Indonesia or less than five seed samples are needed to be surveyed further. Other rec-
ommendations for active in situ and ex situ conservation are provided in this article which
will help to ensure conservation of medicinal plants in Indonesia.
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC
BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction

Medicinal plants are useful and valuable. They are defined as all higher plants that have identified uses for medicinal
purposes (Hawkins, 2008; WHO, 2003) arising from the bioactive properties of particular secondary metabolites they contain
(de Padua et al., 1999), and have effects relevant to health as drugs, whether their use has been proven clinically or not
(Farnsworth and Soejarto, 2001). These plants might be used as food and cosmetic (Astutik et al., 2019) and might be har-
vested from the wild and cultivation (WHO, 2003). People traditionally used plant parts, extracts, and complex products to
cure illness (de Padua et al., 1999; Cragg and Newman, 2013). More than 50,000 higher plant species worldwide are estimated
to be classed as medicinal plants (Schippmann et al., 2002). These plants are economically valuable to various communities
(de Padua et al., 1999; Hamilton, 2004; Hawkins, 2008), but to estimate their value is a complicated process which pre-
sumably leads to undervaluation (Org and Brandon, 2014). Nonetheless, in 2018, medicinal plants and related products’ global
export value was estimated at $3.3 billion (Timoshyna et al., 2020).

* Corresponding author. School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
E-mail address: [email protected] (R. Cahyaningsih).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01459
2351-9894/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Indonesia is a country rich in biodiversity (Vavilov, 1935; Ma et al., 2010) with 30,000e40,000 plant species (Myers et al.,
2000; Ministry of National Development Planning, 2016), and 2500e7500 of these species are medicinal plants (Hamid and
Sitepu, 1990; Eisai, 1995; Erdelen et al., 1999), whether native or introduced species, and whether wild or cultivated species
(de Padua et al., 1999). Their value has been recognised around the globe for centuries (Vavilov, 1935; de Padua et al., 1999), for
the use as drugs and cosmetics, and their use in both traditional and current ways (Kolberg and Piterson, 1996; Ministry of
Agriculture, 2014; 2015).
Due to illegal trade, overexploitation and invasive species, medicinal plant species populations in Indonesia are declining
(Hawkins, 2008; Ma et al., 2010). Additionally, as with all biodiversity, plants are also lost due to forest fires, and deforestation
during land conversion intended to construct plantations and public facilities (The World Bank, 2016; Gaveau et al., 2018). On
a broader level, medicinal plants would also be negatively affected by climate change, especially because of rising sea levels,
wave heights, and ocean temperatures (Bellard et al., 2014, Zikra et al., 2015), the soil temperature rise (Sentinella et al., 2020),
and human activity (Nurse et al., 2014). In addition, the waning local knowledge and skills needed to use medicinal plants
(Stevenson, 1998) might contribute to their loss, as well as a general lack of concern over these plants facing the afore-
mentioned threats (Hamilton, 2004).
Generally speaking, conservation and conservation planning are not advanced practices in Indonesia, which is largely due
to the reserved areas for the livestock and sacred areas for the religious purposes owned by local peoples (Carew-Reid, 2002).
So far, in situ and ex situ conservation have been carried out in Indonesia for plant species to some extent. In situ conservation
is defined as “the conservation of ecosystems and natural habitats and the maintenance and recovery of viable populations of
species in their natural surroundings where they have developed their distinctive properties” and ex situ conservation as “the
protection of components of biological diversity outside their natural habitats” by Convention on Biological Diversity (UN,
1992). The home gardens as in situ conservation, called TOGA (Tanaman Obat Keluarga) or Family Medicinal Plant, are
already considered a form of in situ conservation, where local people maintain the genetic diversity of these species (Watson
and Eyzaguirre, 2001; Maxted et al., 2013a), in Indonesia National Policy on Traditional Medicines (KOTRANAS) (Ministry of
Health, 2007). Ex situ field collections of medicinal plants have been undertaken in Java island, like at the Tawangmangu
gardens in Central Java under the Department of Health of the Ministry of Health, two highland gardens (Manoko and Gunung
Putri) and three lowland gardens (Cikampek, Sukamulya and Cimanggu) under the Research Center for Spices and Medicinal
Plants (Indonesia-FAO, 2011). The Sriwijaya regional botanical garden in Sumatra islands also collects medicinal plants, other
than wetlands plants (Purnomo et al., 2015). Traditional medicine industries also usually have a medicinal plants collection
where ex situ or in situ gap analysis can be done (Indonesia-FAO, 2011). However, in light of the numerous medicinal plants
and Indonesia’s size in general, there is a big gap in their plants conservation.
To assist in conservation planning, gap analysis has been done in many flora species and groups. For example, it has been
done in wild Hordeum species (Vincent et al., 2012), Aegilops species (Maxted et al., 2008), Crop Wild Relative (CWR) groups
(Meilleur and Hodgkin, 2004; Fielder et al., 2015; Tas et al., 2019; Phillips et al., 2019), and threatened medicinal plants (Chi
et al., 2017). Gap analysis is a method to identify areas in which selected elements of biodiversity are under-represented,
whether on a local, national or global scale, and whether in situ or and ex situ (Burley, 1988; Margules and Pressey, 2000).
Technically, it involves defining the species or species groups that would be conserved, assessing current in situ and ex situ
analysis, reformulating conservation strategy, and defining future challenge gaps (Maxted et al., 2008). This study aims to
analyse current Indonesian priority medicinal plant species diversity and provide recommendations for in situ and ex situ
conservation action. The priority species are based on Cahyaningsih et al.’s study (2021, in press) native to Indonesia, have
limited distributions, are harvested destructively, and/or those included in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (https://
www.iucnredlist.org; IUCN, 2020), those included in Appendices I and II of the Convention on International Trade in En-
dangered Species of Fauna and Flora (https://checklist.cites.org; UNEP-WCMC (Comps.), 2020), those included in Indonesian
national legislation, namely Indonesian Government Regulation Act. 7 of 1999 regarding Natural Genetic Resources and Its
Ecosystem, Decree of Forestry Ministry No 57/MENHUT-II/2008 regarding Strategy Direction of National Species Conservation
2008e2018, Decree of Environmental and Forestry Ministry No. P.20/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/6/2018 regarding the Protected
Flora and Fauna Species, Decree of Environmental and Forestry Ministry P.106/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/12/2018 revised
decree of Environmental and Forestry Ministry P.92/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/8/2018 (replaced the Decree of Environmental
and Forestry Ministry No. P.20/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/6/2018) regarding the Protected Flora and Fauna Species, and rare
plant stated in IBSAP (Indonesia Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, The National Development Planning Agency (2003)).
Meanwhile, there are three specific objectives, namely (1) to identify the richest area of Indonesian priority medicinal plant
species, (2) to identify areas where additional ex situ priority medicinal plant species should be collected, and (3) to
recommend existing protected sites and sites outside protected areas (PAs) that might create the basis of in situ genetic
reserves to conserve the Indonesian priority medicinal plant species.

2. Methods

We used 233 Indonesian priority medicinal plant species (Cahyaningsih et al., 2021, in press; result; Table A1) in gap
analysis study. The applied methods on gap analysis were adapted from Maxted et al. (2008); Fielder et al. (2015); Tas et al.
(2019); Phillips et al. (2019). Data for priority medicinal plant species of Indonesia were collated from online database that
was from GBIF (http://www.gbif.org; GBIF, 2020), Genesys (https://www.genesys-pgr.org; Genesys, 2020), BOLD database
(http://www.boldsystems.org; Ratnasingham and Hebert, 2007), Missouri Botanical Garden’s Tropicos database

2
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

(Tropicos.org, 2020) and herbarium databases from Indonesia (Herbarium Bogoriense and), and abroad (Royal Botanic
Garden, Kew; Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh; and The Natural History Museum in the United Kingdom, and also Naturalis
herbarium in the Netherlands) and living collection database from Bogor Botanic GardenseIndonesian Institute of Sciences in
Indonesia. The occurrence data were recorded as longitude and latitude decimals and nomenclature followed from Plants of
the World Portal (http://plantsoftheworldonline.org/, POWO, 2020). The majority of specimens lacked coordinates therefore
these were found from location data in Google Earth (http://www.cartographic.info). In some cases, some inaccurate spec-
imens’ records, for example were only found in the main island without exact location but the collector was available, the
occurrences were able to track from http://www.nationaalherbarium.nl/FMCollectors/Home.htm. All collected data were
examined using DIVA-GIS 7.5 software to identify locations on land and inside the Indonesia border, otherwise to re-examine
the data and either correct the record or exclude it.
An examination of the richness of species and potential bias of observation analyses were undertaken in the DIVA-GIS 7.5
(Hijmans et al., 2001). Country boundary files were obtained from www.diva-gis.org. The species richness was used to
identify diversity hotspots that contain the highest number of different medicinal plant species in Indonesia. The bias was
used to identify areas where a majority of species (or collections or observations) are located based on occurrence data.
Species richness was assessed using the Point to Grid function. The parameter of species name was selected. A new grid was
created with a grid cell size set at 0.45 (equivalent to 50 km
50 km or 2500 km2), the point to grid procedure of Simple was
selected, and the output variable was set as Richness with No Data hidden. For observational bias, the steps were the same;
however, the output variable selected was set at Number of Observations. The program automatically defined the number
class, the value in each class of species richness, and the observation bias.
A complementarity analysis (reserve selection) was conducted in DIVA-GIS 7.5 by selecting Reverse Selection in the Point
to Grid function. The scoring approach parameters used was Equal weight with the maximum number of iterations chosen.
This analysis was undertaken with the Point to Grid procedure. To establish an effective network (reserve site) for in situ
conservation, grid cells were selected that capture a maximum number of plant species (Hijmans et al., 2001). The application
was used to adapt the work of Rebelo (1994), in that the study selected the grid cells with the highest number of species, and
then selected species within the cell were excluded from the analysis (this is repeated until all species have been selected).
The complementary analysis value was obtained by the Arc-Map 10.4.1 tool, that is number of different species in a cell
compared to previous cells (unique species). The results were overlapped with 733 protected areas (PAs) in Indonesia, which
were downloaded from the World Database on Protected Areas (the “WDPA Materials”) available at the ProtectedPlanet.net
website (UNEP-WCMC et al., 2018). The complementarity map would be the proposed in situ reserve site, which will help to
conserve most Indonesian medicinal plant species efficiently. An ex situ gap analysis was undertaken by comparing the maps
of all species richness (¼ all observations) with ex situ collected species richness using the overlay function in DIVA GIS 7.5.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Species richness and observation bias of Indonesian priority medicinal plant species

A map of species’ richness and observation bias of priority medicinal plant species in Indonesia was created from a total of
6704 occurrence points. The map of species richness (Fig. 1) showed that the richest area (red colour) is in the western part of
Java, particularly around the West Java and Banten province region, Mount Gede-Pangrango and Mount Halimun-Salak. Here,

Fig. 1. Species richness map of priority medicinal plant species (grid of 50 km x 50).

3
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

67e82 priority species are found per area of 2500 km2 (grid size) and are mostly found within PAs, for example Gunung
Halimun Salak National Park, Gunung Gede Pangrango Nature Park, and Gunung Mega Mendung Nature Reserve.
Medicinal plant species are distributed across all the major islands but there is at least one grid cell that is richer than its
surrounding area (other cells), apart from Papua. The richness map shows the Sundalands which encompasses Sumatra, Java,
and Kalimantan island, the Wallacea which encompasses the Lesser Sunda Islands (LSI), Sulawesi, and Maluku islands, and the
Australia area which encompasses Papua. According to Myers et al. (2000), Sundalands and Wallaceae are included in a
hotspot meaning they have richer biodiversity than Australia, although it is allegedly because there has been less collection in
Papua than in other areas.
The observational bias map of Indonesian priority medicinal plant species (Fig. 2) shows that almost all of the species rich
areas occur also contain high number of species observations, particularly in the western part of Java island with 291e363
priority species per one grid cell (2500 km2). Western Java, especially Bogor Regency and its surroundings, are mountainous
areas such as Mount Salak and Mount Gede-Pangrango where many plants are located, as well as the nearby capital city of
Jakarta. Most research on medicinal plant species is currently conducted in the Natural Reserve of Mount Gede Pangrango
(Fahrurozi et al., 2016; Astutik et al., 2016). Jepson and Whittaker (2002) stated that botanists collect plants in easy-to-access
areas more often than not so most of the sites with species richness may be due to the ease of plant collection rather than
reflecting true diversity itself. However, since western Java island, namely Banten, West Java, and the Special Region for the
Capital City Jakarta (DKI Jakarta) province have the highest population density in Indonesia (BPS-Statistics Indonesia, 2019), it
is a concern for the area to save the medicinal plant species in active in situ conservation.
The identified areas where observation bias occurred can be traced to a current lack of knowledge for most species or
species group distribution; this is known as the Wallacean shortfall (Bini et al., 2006; Hortal et al., 2014). This mostly occurs in
tropical biodiversity hotspot areas (Bini et al., 2006), when high plant diversity in one area is in line with a high collection
number, then the area may not represent the actual plant diversity that occurs in reality (Monsarrat et al., 2019). Distribution
modelling of species may rectify the bias in data since it will reveal the predicted distribution of the plants that represent the
diversity, regardless of the attractiveness of area to plant collectors (Bini et al., 2006; Monsarrat et al., 2019).

3.2. In situ and ex situ gap analysis of Indonesian priority medicinal plant species

The complementary analysis resulted in 41 grid cells of networks (reserve sites), shown in Fig. 3 and Table 1. Some 33 out
of 41 reserve sites overlap with protected areas (PAs) and can be found in Indonesia’s major islands. These overlapping areas
currently have passive conservation for Indonesian priority medicinal plant species that could be sites for future active
conservation plans for medicinal plants. In addition, outside of the current PAs, eight reserve sites are recommended for
priority purposes as potential new protected areas, four in Kalimantan, three in Sumatra and one in Java island (Fig. 3).
In situ conservation of Indonesian priority medicinal plant species is very important because it would protect three
conditions: conservation of ecosystems, viable populations, and natural habitats (UN, 1992; Badola and Aitken, 2003). Me-
dicinal plants have been passively conserved in existing PA, therefore species management and monitoring are conducted
after as a form of active conservation (Iriondo et al., 2012). In existing PA, the in situ conservation could be done on-farm
(Watson and Eyzaguirre, 2001; Maxted et al., 2013b). “Quasi in situ”, or a bridge between in situ and ex situ, species con-
servation could be initiated, as the maintaining space for collection will be less and costs will be lower, within highly suitable

Fig. 2. Bias of observation map of Indonesian priority medicinal plant species (grid of 50 km
50 km).

4
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Fig. 3. The complementary network areas map (grid of 50 km
50 km) which conserve Indonesian priority medicinal plant species and overlapped with PA (in
light green) for their in situ conservation. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this
article.)

Table 1
Site proposed for in situ conservation of priority medicinal plants species of Indonesia.

Reserve PA area No. No. Location (Province) Major

site Protected Unique island
Species species
1 Gunung Pancar Nature Recreation Park; Gunung Halimun Salak National Park; 82 82 West Java, Banten, Java
Gunung Gede Pangrango Nature Park; Pancoran Mas Grand Forest Park; Rompi Jakarta
Nature Recreation Park; Arca Domas Nature Reserve; Gunung Mega Mendung
Nature Reserve
2 Padang Sugihan Wildlife Reserve 34 20 South Sumatra Sumatra
3 Ir. H. Juanda Grand Forest Park; Gunung Burangrang Nature Reserve; Gunung 33 8 West Java Java
Tangkuban Parahu Nature Recreation Park; Gunung Masigit Kareumbi Hunting Park;
Kawah Kamojang Nature Reserve; Gunung Tilu Nature Reserve
4 Gunung Halimun Salak National Park; Gunung Gede Pangrango Nature Park; 31 4 West Java Java
Takokak Nature Reserve; Tangkuban Prahu Pelabuhan Ratu Nature Reserve;
Situgunung Nature Recreation Park; Cibodas Biosphere Reserve (Gunung Gede-
Pangrango) UNESCO-MAB Biosphere Reserve
5 Teluk Ambon Marine Multiple Use Reserve 30 10 Maluku Maluku
6 Gebukan Nature Reserve; Sepakung Nature Reserve; Gunung Merbabu National 28 1 Central Java, Java
Park; Gunung Merapi National Park; Gunung Bunder Grand Forest Park; Imogiri Yogyakarta
National Reserve; Paliyan Wildlife Reserve; Plawangan Turgo Nature Recreation
Park
7 Gunung Merapi National Park; Gunung Bunder Grand Forest Park; Imogiri National 26 15 Yogyakarta, Central Java
Reserve; Paliyan Wildlife Reserve; Plawangan Turgo Nature Reserve Java
8a Lembah Harau Nature Reserve; Lembah Harau Nature Recreation Park; Gunung Sago 23 10 West Sumatra Sumatra
Malintang Nature Recreation Park; Gunung Marapi Nature Recreational Park;
Singgalang Tandikat Nature Recreation Park; Batang Palupuh Nature Reserve
8b Ale Aisio Wildlife Reserve; KKPN Laut Sawu Marine National Park 23 4 East Nusa Tenggara LSI
8c Sigogor Nature Reserve; Picis Nature Reserve 23 2 East Java Java
8d Getas Nature Reserve 23 1 Central Java Java
9 No 20 2 Central Java, Java
Yogyakarta
10 No 18 4 North Sumatra Sumatra
11 No 17 2 Jambi Sumatra
12a Gunung Lokon National Park; Gunung Manembo-nembo Wildlife Reserve; Bunaken 16 6 North Sulawesi Sulawesi
Marine National Park
12b Gunung Meja Nature Recreation Park; Pegunungan Arfak Nature Reserve 16 6 West Papua Papua
12c Bukit Rimbang Bukit Baling Wildlife Reserve; Batang Pangean I Nature Reserve 16 4 West Sumatra, Riau Sumatra
12d KPPD Kepulauan Derawan dan Perairan Sekitarnya Coastal and Small Island Park 16 1 East Kalimantan Kalimantan
13 Gunung Celering Nature Reserve; Keling I Nature Reserve; Keling II/III Nature 15 1 Central Java Java
Reserve
14 Rimbo Panti Nature Recreation Park; Malampah Alahan Panjang Wildlife Reserve 11 2 West Sumatra, Sumatra
North Sumatra, Riau
(continued on next page)

5
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Table 1 (continued )

Reserve PA area No. No. Location (Province) Major

site Protected Unique island
Species species
15 Bukit Baka-Bukit Raya National Park 10 7 Central Kalimantan, Kalimantan
West Kalimantan
17 Bukit Dua Belas National Park 8 3 Jambi Sumatra
16a no 9 3 East Kalimantan, Kalimantan
North Kalimantan
16b Bukit Barisan Selatan Grand Forest Park; Tinggi Raja Nature Reserve; Martelu Purba 9 2 North Sumatra Sumatra
Nature Reserve
18a no 7 2 North Kalimantan Kalimantan
18b Kutai National Park 7 1 East Kalimantan Kalimantan
18c Rawa Cipanggang Nature Reserve 7 1 West Java, Central Java
Java
19a KKPD Kabupaten Tapanuli Tengah, Kawasan Konservasi Perairan Daerah Kabupaten 6 2 North Sumatra Sumatra
Tapanuli Tengah Locally Managed Marine Area
19b no 6 1 West Kalimantan Kalimantan
19c Gunung Leuser National Park; Rawa Singkil Wildlife Reserve 6 1 Aceh; North Sumatra
Sumatra
20a Bintan Locally Managed Marine Area 5 3 Bangka Belitung Sumatra
20b Gunung Ambang Nature Reserve; Bogani Nani Wartanobe National Park 5 1 North Sulawesi Sulawesi
20c Pegunungan Arfak Nature Reserve 5 1 West Papua Papua
21a Bukit Batu Wildlife Reserve 4 1 Riau Sumatra
21b Malampah Alahan Panjang Wildlife Reserve; Maninjau Nature Reserve; KKPD 4 1 West Sumatra Sumatra
Kabupaten Agam, Kawasan Konservasi Perairan Daerah Kabupaten Agam Locally
Managed Marine Area
22a Batang Gadis National Park 3 1 North Sumatra Sumatra
22b Sultan Thaha Syaifuddin Grand Forest Park; Durian Luncuk I, II Nature Reserve; 3 1 Jambi, South Sumatra
Sumatra
23a Batang Gadis National Park; Barumun Nature Reserve 2 1 North Sumatra, Riau Sumatra
23b No 2 1 North Sumatra, Sumatra
West Sumatra
24a KKPN Kepulauan Anambas dan Laut Sekitarnya Marine Recreation Park 1 1 Riau Islands Sumatra
24b No 1 1 West Kalimantan Kalimantan

Noted: LSI ¼ the Lesser Sunda Islands.

environments allowing for natural maintenance for medicinal plants (Volis and Blecher, 2010). The human populations
surrounding PAs could either actively conserve as a priority or contribute to plants’ extinction. To help with in situ conser-
vation action, the government could introduce legislation regarding how to protect and use medicinal plants and how to
promote conservation education by conservationists (Volis, 2019).
The ex situ gap analysis showed that the area most in need of further collection is the Western part of Java and Maluku
(Fig. 4). These areas are habitats where Indonesian priority medicinal species are found most frequently but have not been
collected for ex situ conservation. Taking into account their habitat degradation, especially due to high recorded deforestation
(average forest loss reaches 1.3M ha/year, 2000e2017) (FWI, 2020), ex situ conservation for Indonesian priority medicinal
species is crucial.
Thirty-eight Indonesian priority medicinal plant species are undercollected species (having less than five occurrence
records) (Table 2). Twelve species out of 38 undercollected species have no recorded occurrence in wild collections. In
addition, six priority species out of them have been conserved in ex situ sites. These species should take first place in con-
servation plan that is to conduct surveys in wild habitats to record their occurrences. They would be maintained and
propagated outside of their habitat using conventional methods as well as advanced biotechnology (Ford-Lloyd et al., 2011),
and would be well-documented, as a genetically representative collection (BGCI, 2012) that could be in the form of seed,
pollen, DNA, in vitro storage, field gene bank, or even in a botanic garden (Maxted et al., 2013b). Living collections in botanic
gardens would facilitate propagation and botany research, public education, species reintroduction and habitat restoration
programmes (IPGRI, 2004; BGCI, 2012).
The effective in situ and ex situ conservation of Indonesian medicinal plant species should be a regional and global priority.
Considering Indonesia is one of the biggest archipelagos in South East Asia with vast size and rich biodiversity (Myers et al.,
2000; van Welzen et al., 2011, Mittermeier et al., 2011). Moreover, the country is home to an estimated 10% of world plant
species (Walujo, 2008). It is one of the Centres of Origin of Cultivated Plants, accommodating many cultivated plants for many
ethnobotanical purposes (Vavilov, 1935).
There is a large conservation gap in Indonesian priority medicinal plant species forming part of conservation planning,
although those species are part of 60e90% of global wild harvested medicinal plants and have faced a threefold increase in
trade since 1999 (Jenkins et al., 2018). Thus, in situ and ex situ conservation for Indonesian priority medicinal plant species
have to be combined, principally in propagation to support reintroduction and to provide suitable environmental conditions
for further domestication (Bari cevic, 2009). Both approaches to conservation are inter-linked as they are complementary and

6
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Fig. 4. Ex situ gap map of Indonesian priority medicinal plant species conservation (grid of 50 km
50 km).

Table 2
Indonesian priority medicinal plant species with less than five occurrence points.

No. Scientific name (POWO, 2020) Family Ex situ Occ. points Note
1 Avicennia marina var. rumphiana (Hallier f.) Bakh. Acanthaceae A 2
2 Myriopteron extensum (Wight) K.Schum. Apocynaceae A 0 Unclear location
3 Alocasia cuprea K.Koch Araceae A 0 No Indonesia
4 Johannesteijsmannia altifrons (Rchb.f. and Zoll.) H.E.Moore Arecaceae A 1
5 Saribus woodfordii (Ridl.) Bacon and W.J.Baker Arecaceae A 0 No Indonesia (PNG)
6 Balanophora fungosa subsp. indica (Arn.) B.Hansen Balanophoraceae A 1
7 Garcinia amboinensis Spreng. Clusiaceae A 0 cultivated in Bogor BG
8 Rourea fulgens Planch. Connaraceae A 1
9 Erycibe aenea Prain Convolvulaceae A 3
10 Fimbristylis falcata (Vahl) Kunth Cyperaceae A 0 No Indonesia (PNG)
11 Homalanthus longistylus K.Schum. and Lauterb. Euphorbiaceae A 0 No Indonesia (PNG)
12 Entada spiralis Ridl. Fabaceae A 1
13 Gnetum tenuifolium Ridl. Gnetaceae A 1
14 Hibiscus celebicus Koord Malvaceae A 4
15 Dissochaeta punctulata Hook.f. ex Triana Melastomataceae A 3
16 Heynea trijuga Roxb. Meliaceae A 3
17 Nepenthes ampullacea Jack Nepenthaceae A 1
18 Dendrobium faciferum J.J.Sm. Orchidaceae P (N) 4
19 Dendrobium hymenanthum Rchb.f. Orchidaceae A 0 No Indonesia (Asean)
20 Dendrobium utile J.J.Sm. Orchidaceae P (N) 0 No gbif data
21 Erythrorchis altissima (Blume) Blume Orchidaceae A 3
22 Hetaeria obliqua Blume Orchidaceae P (N) 3
23 Oberonia mucronata (D.Don) Ormerod and Seidenf. Orchidaceae A 1
24 Strongyleria pannea (Lindl.) Schuit., Y.P.Ng and H.A.Pedersen Orchidaceae P (N) 1
25 Vanda miniata (Lindl.) L.M.Gardiner Orchidaceae A 1
26 Vanilla abundiflora J.J.Sm. Orchidaceae P (N) 3
27 Vanilla griffithii Rchbf Orchidaceae P (N) 3
28 Pandanus robinsonii Merr. Pandanaceae A 2
29 Piper attenuatum Buch.-Ham. ex Miq. Piperaceae A 1
30 Oldenlandia recurva (Korth.) Miq. Rubiaceae A 0 No gbif data
31 Prismatomeris tetrandra subsp. malayana (Ridl.) J.T.Johanss. Rubiaceae A 1
32 Rennellia morindiformis (Korth.) Ridl. Rubiaceae A 4
33 Uncaria homomalla Miq Rubiaceae A 1
34 Palaquium hispidum H.J.Lam Sapotaceae A 0 No Indonesia (Malaysia)
35 Pipturus asper Wedd. Urticaceae A 3
36 Ampelocissus cinnamomea (Wall.) Planch. Vitaceae A 2
37 Amomum sumatranum (Valeton) Skornick. and Hlavat a Zingiberaceae A 0 No gbif data
38 Kaempferia undulata Wender. Zingiberaceae A 0 Unclear location

Notes: A: Absent, P: Present in national ex situ conservation.

7
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

provide a safety back-up (Maxted et al., 2020). Conservation action applied to crop wild relatives, such as management and
monitoring following the quality standards of genetic reserves (Iriondo et al., 2012), could also be applied to Indonesian
medicinal plant species, which is generally for maximising their availability for users in a sustainable manner (Maxted et al.,
1997). The complementary analysis within the current PA network might be more economical because it requires only a few
adaptions to existing management plans (Maxted and Kell, 2009). The success of medicinal plant species conservation needs
to be managed within board fields, namely several different groups with their expertise such as agronomy, conservation, and
ethnobotany (Hawkins, 2008). Moreover, conducting in situ conservation in many reserves sites and further plant collections
for ex situ conservation would be possible when local stakeholders seriously take conservation action (Phillips et al., 2019).

4. Conclusion

We propose four recommendations to conserve the Indonesian priority medicinal plant species actively for the short term
and long term and to support the sustainable availability of material for related stakeholders, that are as follows:

1. Establish species distribution models for Indonesian priority medicinal plant species as base maps to decrease the bias of observation and conduct
further surveying for the current population study. Scientists like botany researchers, plant conservationists and ethnobotanists from government or
private institutions might complete this surveying.
2. Create active conservation in current protected areas for bridging in situ and ex situ conservation (Volis and Blecher, 2010) of Indonesian priority me-
dicinal plant species which are used to passive conservation, and the establishment of new protected areas to strengthen the conservation of priority
medicinal plant species in order to maximise the PA roles in priority conservation (Fig. 3 and Table 1). These in situ reserve sites could protect priority
species, providing important information for medicinal plant species stakeholders. Toledo (2018) recommended new protected areas able to conserve
more than 5% species of total priority species. Local or national government could create a new policy regarding active conservation for medicinal plant
species in related PA. Involving local people surrounding the PA through dissemination from related scientists from government or private institutions
would help the conservation action in the field, including monitoring.
3. Undertake domestication and intensive propagation of six priority species underrepresented in situ which have already been collected in ex situ areas, to
support reintroduction of these species to their natural habitat (short-term conservation). Furthermore, introduction of any priority species that is
already assessed as threatened with extinction according to the IUCN Red Liste in particular, critically endangered species to areas that are predicted to
be suitable for the species (though there are no past records that might help their conservation) (Volis, 2019). Botany researchers and plant conser-
vationists from government or private institutions could start from the propagation research, whether conservative or advanced methods have enough
provenance, or whether seedlings for planting are best used in the natural habitat of those species.
4. Maintain priority species, including propagated plants, both vegetative or generative, in current in situ and ex situ conservation areas, to ensure their
long-term conservation and sustainable use. All related stakeholders, especially producers of medicinal plant species, might commit to this maintenance,
through long-term conservation for sustainable use.

Moreover, this action may meet Aichi Biodiversity targets, namely Target 12, Target 13, and Target 1 in direct and close
order. Target 12, Target 13, and Target 1 respectively state “By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been
prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained”, “By 2020,
the genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and of wild relatives, including other socio-
economically as well as culturally valuable species, is maintained, and strategies have been developed and implemented for
minimising genetic erosion and safeguarding their genetic diversity”, and “By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the
values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably” (CBD, 2015).

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Table A.1
Priority medicinal plant species included in this study

Family Genera Spc. no. Family Genera Spc. no.

Acanth. Avicennia 1 Marant. Halopegia 1

Barleria 1 Melastomat. Dissochaeta 1
Hypoestes 1 Medinilla 2
Pseuderanthemum 1 Oxyspora 2
Achari. Pangium 1 Phyllagathis 1
Anacardi.o. Koordersiodendron 1 Meli. Heynea 1
Anaxagorea 1 Toona 1
Goniothalamus 2 Menisperm. Stephania 1
Api. Pimpinella 1 Tinospora 1
Apocyn. Alstonia 2 Mor. Ficus 2
Alyxia 3 Myric. Myrica 1
Hunteria 1 Myrt. Syzygium 2
Rauvolfia 1 Nepenth. Nepenthes 7
Urceola 1 Orchid. Acriopsis 1

8
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Table A.1 (continued )

Family Genera Spc. no. Family Genera Spc. no.

Voacanga 1 Apostasia 1
Willughbeia 1 Arundina 1
Araucari. Agathis 1 Calanthe 1
Arec. Borassus 1 Cleisostoma 1
Caryota 1 Corymborkis 1
Eugeissona 1 Cymbidium 1
Iguanura 1 Dendrobium 4
Johannesteijsmannia 1 Erythrorchis 1
Phoenix 1 Grammatophyllum 2
Pigafetta 1 Habenaria 2
Aristolochi. Thottea 1 Hetaeria 1
Aster. Blumea 2 Liparis 2
Balanophor. Balanophora 1 Nervilia 2
Bignoni. Oroxylum 1 Oberonia 2
Calophyll. Mesua 1 Renanthera 1
Cardiopterid. Gonocaryum 1 Robiquetia 1
Ciboti. Cibotium 1 Spathoglottis 2
Combret. Terminalia 1 Strongyleria 1
Connar. Rourea 1 Tropidia 1
Convolvul. Erycibe 1 Vanda 1
Cucurbit. Trichosanthes 1 Vanilla 2
Cycad. Cycas 1 Pandan. Benstonea 1
Dicksoni. Dicksonia 1 Pandanus 2
Dioscore. Dioscorea 2 Phyllanth. Breynia 1
Dipterocarp. Anisoptera 3 Phyllanthus 1
Dipterocarpus 4 Pin. Pinus 1
Hopea 3 Piper. Piper 2
Parashorea 1 Pontederi. Pontederia 1
Shorea 13 Primul. Ardisia 1
Vatica 2 Rafflesi. Rafflesia 2
Macaranga 1 Rubi. Catunaregam 1
Cajanus 1 Mussaenda 1
Dalbergia 5 Pavetta 1
Derris 1 Prismatomeris 1
Entada 1 Psychotria 1
Euchresta 1 Rennellia 1
Intsia 1 Uncaria 1
Koompassia 1 Rut. Lunasia 1
Parkia 2 Melicope 1
Phyllodium 1 Micromelum 1
Sindora 1 Murraya 1
Fag. Castanopsis 2 Zanthoxylum 2
Lithocarpus 2 Santal. Santalum 1
Gentian. Gentiana 1 Sapind. Dodonaea 1
Utania 1 Schisandr. Kadsura 1
Gnet. Gnetum 1 Simaroub. Eurycoma 2
Gunner. Gunnera 1 Soulamea 1
Hamamelid. Exbucklandia 1 Smilac. Smilax 1
Himantandr. Galbulimima 1 Stemonur. Gomphandra 1
Ixonanth. Ixonanthes 1 Symploc. Symplocos 2
Lami. Scutellaria 1 Tax. Taxus 1
Vitex 1 Thymelae. Aquilaria 3
Laur. Beilschmiedia 1 Gonystylus 2
Cinnamomum 2 Urtic. Maoutia 1
Cryptocarya 1 Nothocnide 1
Eusideroxylon 1 Pipturus 1
Logani. Strychnos 2 Poikilospermum 1
Lythr. Woodfordia 1 Vit. Ampelocissus 3
Malv. Grewia 1 Leea 1
Helicteres 1 Zingiber. Curcuma 5
Hibiscus 1 Kaempferia 1
Wurfbainia 1

9
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Acknowledgements

We fully acknowledge the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia (Grant no. is 20160722038259) through the
Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) for funding this study to R. Cahyaningsih. We thank the Indonesian her-
barium (Herbarium Bogoriense), the Registration and Nursery Subdivision of Bogor Botanic Garden (BBG) - Indonesian
Institute of Sciences (LIPI), Naturalis Biodiversity Centre (the Netherlands), herbarium in the United Kingdom, namely the
Royal Botanic Gardens Kew-RBGK, the Royal Botanic Gardens Edinburgh-RBGE, and the Natural History Museum-NHM for
providing some plant occurrences for analyses in this study. We also express our appreciation to Dr Jade Phillips for helpful
discussion regarding the manuscript’s clarity and anonymous reviewers for the thorough and careful review and useful
comments in enhancing our manuscript quality.

References

Astutik, S., Fahrurozi, I., Priyanti, P., 2016. Keanekaragaman Jenis Tumbuhan Obat di Hutan Taman Nasional Gunung Gede Pangrango (medicinal plant
diversity in Gunung Gede national Park). AL-Kauniyah J. Biol. 8, 2013e2016. https://doi.org/10.15408/kauniyah.v8i2.2696.
Astutik, S., Pretzsch, J., Kimengsi, J.N., 2019. Asian medicinal plants’ production and utilisation potentials: a review. Sustain. Times 11. https://doi.org/10.
3390/su11195483.
Badola, H.K., Aitken, S., 2003. The Himalayas of India: a treasury of medicinal plants under siege. Biodiversity 4, 3e13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14888386.
2003.9712694.
Bari
cevi c, D., 2009. The contribution of ECPGR to global strategies for the conservation, sustainable management and use of medicinal and aromatic plants.
In: Lipman (Ed.), 2009. Report of a Working Group on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants. Second Meeting, 16-18 December 2004, Strumica, Macedonia FYR/
Third Meeting, 26e28 June 2007, Olomouc, Czech Republic. Bioversity International, Rome, Italy. In Report of a Working Group on Medicinal and
Aromatic Plants.
Bellard, C., Leclerc, C., Courchamp, F., 2014. Impact of sea level rise on the 10 insular biodiversity hotspots. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 23, 203e212. https://doi.
org/10.1111/geb.12093.
BGCI, 2012. Global strategy for plant conservation a guide to the GSPC. Botanic Gardens Conservation International.
Bini, L.M., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Bastos, R.P., Pinto, M.P., 2006. Challenging Wallacean and Linnean shortfalls: knowledge gradients and
conservation planning in a biodiversity hotspot. Divers. Distrib. 12, 475e482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2006.00286.x.
BPS-Statistics, 2019. Statistical Year Book of Indonesia 2019. BPS-Statistics Indonesia.
Burley, F.W., 1988. Diversity for setting priorities in conservation in national academy of Sciences. In: Wilson, E.O. (Ed.), Biodiversity. The National Acad-
emies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/989.
Cahyaningsih, R., Magos Brehm, J., Maxted, N., 2021. Setting the priority medicinal plants for conservation in Indonesia. In press Genetic Resources and Crop
Evolution journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-021-01115-6. Springer.
Carew-Reid, J., 2002. Biodiversity Planning in Asia: Chapter 5. Indonesia. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, p. 594. þ vi pp.
CBD, 2015. Aichi Biodiversity Targets. CBD Secretariat, Ottawa, Canada. http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/default.shtml. (Accessed 13 November 2020).
Chi, X., Zhang, Z., Xu, X., Zhang, X., Zhao, Z., Liu, Y., Wang, Q., Wang, H., Li, Y., Yang, G., Guo, L., Tang, Z., Huang, L., 2017. Threatened medicinal plants in China:
distributions and conservation priorities. Biol. Conserv. 210, 89e95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.04.015.
Cragg, G.M., Newman, D.J., 2013. Natural products: a continuing source of novel drug leads. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Gen. Subj. 1830, 36703695. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.02.008.
Medicinal and poisonous plants 1. PROSEA. In: de Padua, L.S., Bunyapraphatsara, N., Lemmens, R.H.M.J. (Eds.), Plant Resources of South-East Asia 12 (1).
Eisai, 1995. Medicinal Herb Index in Indonesia, second ed. PT. Eisai Indonesia.
Erdelen, W.R., Adimihardja, K., Moesdarsono, H., 1999. Biodiversity, traditional medicine and the sustainable use of indigenous medicinal plants in
Indonesia. Indig. Knowl. Dev. Monit. 3e6.
Fahrurozi, I., Priyanti, Astutik, S., 2016. Keanekaragaman jenis Tumbuhan Obat pada plot cuplikan. J. Biol. Website 8, 101e106.
Farnsworth, N.R., Soejarto, D.D., 2001. Global importance of medicinal plants. Conserv. Med. Plants 25e52. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511753312.005.
Fielder, H., Brotherton, P., Hosking, J., Hopkins, J.J., Ford-Lloyd, B., Maxted, N., 2015. Enhancing the conservation of crop wild relatives in England. PloS One
10, e0130804. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130804.
Ford-Lloyd, B.V., Schmidt, M., Armstrong, S.J., Barazani, O., Engels, J., Hadas, R., Hammer, K., Kell, S.P., Kang, D., Khoshbakht, K., Li, Y., Long, C., Lu, B.-R., Ma, K.,
Nguyen, V.T., Qiu, L., Ge, S., Wei, W., Zhang, Z., Maxted, N., 2011. Crop wild relativesdundervalued, underutilised and under threat? Bioscience 61,
559e565. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.10.
FWI, 2020. JALAN DEFORESTASI INDONESIA (Deforestation Road in Indonesia). https://fwi.or.id/. (Accessed 14 November 2020).
Gaveau, D.L.A., Locatelli, B., Salim, M.A., Pacheco, P., Sheil, D., 2018. Rise and fall of forest loss and industrial plantations in Borneo (2000e2017). Conserv.
Lett. 1e8 https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12622.
GBIF, 2020. Biodiversity Occurrence Data Available through the GBIF Data Portal. www.gbif.org.
Genesys, 2020. Genesis data base. https://www.genesys-pgr.org.
Hamid, A., Sitepu, D., 1990. An understanding of native herbal medicine in Indonesia. Industrial Crops Research Journal 3 (1), 11e17.
Hamilton, A.C., 2004. Medicinal plants, conservation and livelihoods. Biodivers. Conserv. 13, 1477e1517. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000021333.23413.
42.
Hawkins, B., 2008. Plants for Life: Medicinal Plant Conservation and Botanic Gardens. Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Richmond, U.K.
Hijmans, R.J., Guarino, L., Cruz, M., Rojas, E., 2001. Computer tools for spatial analysis of plant genetic resources data: 1. DIVA-GIS. Plant Genet. Resour.
Newsl. 127, 15e19.
Hortal, J., de Bello, F., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Lewinsohn, T.M., Lobo, J.M., Ladle, R.J., 2014. Seven shortfalls that beset large-scale knowledge of biodiversity. Annu.
Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 46 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-112414-054400 annurev-ecolsys-112414-054400.
Indonesia-FAO, 2011. Country Report the State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources Indonesia.
IPGRI, 2004. Forest genetic resources conservation and management. In: Plantations and Genebanks, vol. 3. Biodiversity International, Rome.
Iriondo, J.M., Maxted, N., Kell, S.P., Ford-Lloyd, B.V., Lara-Romano, C., Labokas, J., Magos Brehm, J., 2012. Quality standards for genetic reserve conservation of
crop wild relatives. In: Maxted, N., Dulloo, M.E., Ford-Lloyd, B.V., Frese, L., Iriondo, J.M., Pinheiro de Carvalho, M.A.A. (Eds.), Agrobiodiversity Conser-
vation: Securing the Diversity of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp. 72e77.
IUCN, 2020. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2020-2. https://www.iucnredlist.org/. (Accessed 1 June 2020).
Jenkins, M., Timoshyna, A., Cornthwaite, M., 2018. Wild at Home: Exploring the Global Harvest, Trade and Use of Wild Plant Ingredients. https://www.
traffic.org/site/assets/files/7339/wild-at-home.pdf. (Accessed 13 November 2020).
Jepson, P., Whittaker, R.J., 2002. Ecoregions in context: a critique with special reference to Indonesia. Conserv. Biol. 16, 42e57. Conserv. Biol. 16, 42e57.
Kolberg, H., Piterson, M., 1996. Indonesia: Country Report to the FAO International Technical Conference.
Ma, K., et al., 2010. The Convention on Biological Diversity the First Asian Plant Conservation Report.
Margules, C.R., Pressey, R.L., 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405, 243e253. https://doi.org/10.1038/35012251.

10
R. Cahyaningsih, J. Magos Brehm and N. Maxted Global Ecology and Conservation 26 (2021) e01459

Maxted, N., Avagyan, A., Frese, L., Iriondo, J.M., Magos Brehm, J., Singer, A., Kell, S.P., 2013a. Preserving diversity: a concept for in situ conservation of crop
wild relatives in Europe. In: Rome, Italy: in Situ and On-Farm Conservation Network, European Cooperative Programme for Plant Genetic Resources.
Maxted, N., Magos Brehm, J., Kell, S., 2013b. Resource Book for the Preparation of National Plans for Conservation of Crop Wild Relatives and Landraces. FAO
Glob. Plan Action PGRFA.
Maxted, N., Ford-Lloyd, B.V., Hawkes, J.G., 1997. Complementary conservation strategies. In: Maxted, N., Ford-Lloyd, B.V., Hawkes, J.G. (Eds.), Plant Genetic
Conservation: the in Situ Approach. Chapman & Hall, London, UK, pp. 20e55.
Maxted, N., Hunter, D., Ortiz Rios, R.O., 2020. Plant Genetic Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, ISBN 9781139024297, p. 560.
Maxted, N., Kell, S.P., 2009. Establishment of a Global Network for the in Situ Conservation of Crop Wild Relatives: Status and Needs. FAO Commission on
Genetic Resources for Food & Agriculture.
Maxted, N., White, K., Valkoun, J., Konopka, J., Hargreaves, S., 2008. Towards a conservation strategy for Aegilops species. Plant Genet. Resour. Charact. Util.
6, 126e141. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147926210899314X.
Meilleur, B., Hodgkin, T., 2004. In situ conservation of crop wild relatives: statuts and trends. Biodivers. Conserv. 13, 663e684. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:
BIOC.0000011719.03230.17.
Ministry of Agriculture, 2014. Renstra Kementrian Pertanian Pertanian Tahun 2015 - 2019 (Strategic Plan of Ministry of Agriculture 2015-2019). Ministry of
Agriculture of Republic of Indonesia.
Ministry of Agriculture, 2015. Agricultural Statistics. Ministry of Agriculture Republic of Indonesia.
Ministry of Health, 2007. National Policy on Traditional Medicine 2017. Ministry of Health Republic of Indonesia.
Ministry of National Development Planning, 2016. Indonesian Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2015-2020. Indonesian Government.
Mittermeier, R.A., Turner, W.R., Larsen, F.W., 2011. Global Biodiversity Conservation: the Critical Role of Hotspots Chapter 1 Global Biodiversity Conservation:
the Critical Role of Hotspots. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20992-5.
Monsarrat, S., Boshoff, A.F., Kerley, G.I.H., 2019. Accessibility maps as a tool to predict sampling bias in historical biodiversity occurrence records. Ecography
42, 125e136. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.03944.
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca, G.A.B., Kent, J., 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853e858.
https://doi.org/10.1038/35002501.
Nurse, L.A., McLean, R.F., Agard, J., Briguglio, L.P., Duvat-Magnan, V., Pelesikoti, N., Tompkins, E., Webb, A., 2014. Small islands. In: Barros, V.R., Field, C.B.,
Dokken, D.J., Mastrandrea, M.D., Mach, K.J., Bilir, T.E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K.L., Estrada, Y.O., Genova, R.C., Girma, B., Kissel, E.S., Levy, A.N., MacCracken, S.,
Mastrandrea, P.R., White, L.L. (Eds.), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working
Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom
and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1613e1654.
Org, W.C., Brandon, K., 2014. CGD climate and forest paper series #7 ecosystem services from tropical forests: review of current science. Cent. Glob. Dev.
4164000416, 85.
Phillips, J., Whitehouse, K., Maxted, N., 2019. An in situ approach to the conservation of temperate cereal crop wild relatives in the Mediterranean Basin and
Asian centre of diversity. Plant Genet. Resour. Charact. Util. 1e11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479262118000588.
POWO, 2020. Plants of the World Online. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Published on the Internet. http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/.
Retrieved 05 January 2020.
Purnomo, D.W., Magandhi, M., Kuswantoro, F., Risna, R.A., Witono, J.R., 2015. Pengembangan koleksi Tumbuhan kebun raya daerah dalam kerangka strategi
konservasi Tumbuhan di Indonesia. Bul. Kebun Raya 18, 111e124.
Ratnasingham, S., Hebert, P.D.N., 2007. Barcoding BOLD: the barcode of life data system. Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 355e364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.
2006.01678.x.
Rebelo, A.G., 1994. Iterative selection procedures: centres of endemism and optimal placement of reserves. In: Huntley, B.J. (Ed.), Botanical Diversity in
Southern Africa. National Botanic Institute, Pretoria.
Sentinella, A.T., Warton, D.I., Sherwin, W.B., Offord, C.A., Moles, A.T., 2020. Tropical plants do not have narrower temperature tolerances, but are more at risk
from warming because they are close to their upper thermal limits. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1387e1398. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13117.
Schippmann, U., Leaman, D.J., Cunningham, A.B., 2002. Impact of Cultivation and Gathering of Medicinal Plants on Biodiversity: Global Trends and Issues.
FAO, Rome Italy (April 2015).
Stevenson, C., 1998. Reflections from the far east. Compl. Ther. Nurs. Midwifery 4 (1), 1e2.
Tas, N., West, G., Kircalioglu, G., Topaloglu, S.B., Phillips, J., Kell, S., Maxted, N., 2019. Conservation gap analysis of crop wild relatives in Turkey. Plant Genet.
Resour. Charact. Util. 1e10 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479262118000564.
The National Development Planning Agency, 2003. Indonesian Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan National Document. The National Development
Planning Agency.
The World Bank, 2016. The Cost of Fires in Indonesia Sustainable Landscapes Knowledge Note, vol. 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218108550926.
Timoshyna, A., Ke, Z., Yang, Y., Ling, X., Leaman, D., 2020. The Invisible Trade: Wild Plants and You in the Times of COVID-19 and the Essential Journey
towards Sustainability. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Toledo, A.R.C., 2018. A Crop Wild Relative Conservation Strategy for Mexico. University of Birmingham, The United Kingdom.
Tropicosorg, 2020. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO, USA. Available from: http://www.tropicos.org. (Accessed 30 May 2020).
UN, 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity, p. 30.
2020. The Checklist of CITES Species Website. CITES Secretariat, Geneva, Switzerland. Compiled by UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. http://checklist.cites.org/
[Accessed 01.06.2020].
UNEP-WCMC, IUCN, NGS, 2018. Protected Planet Report 2018. Protected Planet Report 2018. UNEP-WCMC, IUCN and NGS: Cambridge UK; Gland,
Switzerland; and Washington, D.C., USA.
van Welzen, P.C., Parnell, J.A.N., Slik, J.W.F., 2011. Wallace’s Line and plant distributions: two or three phytogeographical areas and where to group Java? Biol.
J. Linn. Soc. 103, 531e545. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2011.01647.x.
Vavilov, N.I., 1935. Theoretical basis for plant breeding, vol. 1. Moscow. Origin and geography of cultivated plants. In: The Phytogeographical Basis for Plant
Breeding (D. Love, transl.). Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 316e366.
Vincent, H., Von Bothmer, R., Knüpffer, H., Amri, A., Konopka, J., Maxted, N., 2012. Genetic gap analysis of wild Hordeum taxa. Plant Genet. Resour. Charact.
Util. 10, 242e253. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479262112000317.
Volis, S., 2019. Conservation-oriented restoration e a two for one method to restore both threatened species and their habitats. Plant Divers 41, 50e58.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pld.2019.01.002.
Volis, S., Blecher, M., 2010. Quasi in situ: a bridge between ex situ and in situ conservation of plants. Biodivers. Conserv. 19 (9), 2441e2454. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10531-010-9849-2.
Walujo, E.B., 2008. Research ethnobotany in Indonesia and the future perspectives. Biodiversitas, Journal of Biological Diversity 9 (1), 59e63. https://doi.
org/10.13057/biodiv/d090114.
Watson, J.W., Eyzaguirre, P.B., 2001. Home gardens and in situ conservation of plant genetic resources. In: Watson, J.W., Eyzaguirre, P. (Eds.), Proceedings of
the Second International Home Gardens Workshop: Contribution of Home Gardens to in Situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources in Farming
Systems, 17e19 July 2001, Witzenhausen, Federal Republic of Germany. International Plant Genetic Reso, p. 192.
World Health Organization, 2003. WHO guidelines on good agricultural and collection practices (GACP) for medicinal plants. World Health 99, 67e73.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
Zikra, M., Suntoyo, Lukijanto, 2015. Climate change impacts on Indonesian coastal areas. Procedia Earth Planet. Sci. 14, 57e63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proeps.2015.07.085.

11