Sylvia nana and S. deserti (del Hoyo and Collar 2016) were previously lumped as S. nana following AERC TAC (2003), Cramp et al. (1977-1994), Dowsett and Forbes-Watson (1993) and Sibley and Monroe (1990, 1993).

This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000 km² combined with a declining or fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or severe fragmentation). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size has not been quantified, but it is not believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern.

The global population size has not been quantified.

This species inhabits steppe-desert and semi-desert areas covered with Artemisia, low scrub and grasses and is usually found in sandy terrain but less frequently on stony soils. Egg-laying occurs in the nominate race from late April and in Africa (deserti race) from January to early March in the south of the range. Clutches are usually four to six eggs (Aymí and Gargallo 2016). The nest is a strong, thick-walled cup made of twigs, grass stems, leaves, plant down and cobwebs, lined with finer grasses and fibres and usually down. It is built in low scrub up to 110 cm above the ground (Snow and Perrins 1998). The diet is thought to be mostly small insects with some seeds and berries taken as well. The deserti race is resident to partially migratory but probably largely sedentary or undertaking erratic movements within its desert range (Aymí and Gargallo 2016).

The species is affected by habitat loss driven by overgrazing and agricultural intensification (Hagemeijer and Blair 1997). Continuing drought along with overgrazing has resulted in habitat loss in some areas (Aymí and Gargallo 2016).

Conservation Actions Underway
CMS Appendix II. Bern Convention Appendix II. 

Conservation Actions Proposed
The restoration of suitable habitat is needed for this species. Traditional low-intensity farming and grazing methods should be restored and promoted.