Botany
Botany allocated no candidates in CSS 2025, and like the other science specialisms with thin uptake, its pipeline ended before it really began. Of the 90 candidates who appeared, none cleared the written stage, so the question of allocation never arose. The result marks it as one of the highest-risk optional choices in the examination.
Score Distribution
The mean of 41% clears the 33% threshold on its face, and with the median sitting at the same value the distribution is symmetric rather than propped up by a few outliers. The puzzle is that despite an average above the passing line, not a single candidate cleared the written stage, which means the per-paper scoring captured here did not translate into success against the full requirements of the exam. A standard deviation of 17 points shows a fairly wide scatter, so while some candidates clearly scored well in isolation, the combination of papers and the merit context defeated all of them. A mean above 33% is no guarantee of a pass when the broader profile falls short.
Provincial Breakdown
No provincial allocation data recorded
No province recorded an allocation, because no candidate was allocated anywhere. With every one of the 90 candidates stopped at the written stage, provincial origin had no bearing on a result that was zero across the board.
Gender Distribution
No gender breakdown available — no candidates were allocated in this subject.
No gender breakdown exists, since not one candidate was allocated. Botany offered no allocation opportunity in CSS 2025 to any candidate, whatever their gender or background.
Subject vs CSS Average
Botany's mean of 41% trails the CSS optional-subject average of 43.5% only narrowly, which on its own might suggest an unremarkable paper. The comparison is hollow, though, because that average still produced no written passes and no allocations among the 90 who attempted it. For a candidate making a decision, the relevant fact is not the near-average mean but the simple reality that the subject yielded nothing this year, and the score figure should be read in that light rather than as a sign of accessibility.
Candidate Pipeline
All 90 candidates who appeared failed to pass the written paper, leaving zero passers and therefore zero allocations. The collapse happened entirely within the paper itself, since no one reached the merit stage where overall scorecards are weighed, which makes Botany a subject that stopped its whole field at the first gate.
Botany suits only candidates with a solid academic grounding in the subject who can perform to a high standard across the full paper, and even they should weigh the 2025 outcome carefully. Ninety candidates sat it, none cleared the written stage, and none were allocated. The modest competition is not the opening it appears to be; it is a signal that this subject rarely rewards those who attempt it.
0.00% of Botany candidates earned an allocation, in step with fellow Group-5 subjects English Literature (0.00%) and Urdu Literature (0.00%).
Want to see how Botany stacks up against the rest? Browse every CSS 2025 subject result →
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the pass rate for Botany in CSS 2025?+
In CSS 2025, 90 candidates appeared for Botany, but none cleared the written exam — a 0% written pass rate for the year. With no qualifiers, no candidate was allocated a group through Botany in 2025.
How well do candidates typically score in Botany for CSS?+
Botany candidates scored a median of 41.0% of the paper's marks in CSS 2025 (median 41 out of 100; mean 41.0%), rating it "Average Scoring".
How competitive is Botany for CSS allocation?+
No candidate cleared the written stage for Botany in 2025, so the subject produced zero allocations that year — the toughest possible outcome, independent of how the paper itself was marked.
How many marks are CSS optional subjects worth, and how are they chosen?+
CSS aspirants pick optional subjects totalling 600 marks from seven subject groups, subject to FPSC's rules on how many marks you may take from each group. Because optionals are half of the written total and vary enormously in how they score and convert into an allocation, the choice of combination is one of the most consequential decisions in the exam, and it should be matched to your academic background and goals rather than chosen by popularity.
Where should I start my CSS preparation?+
Start with CSSNorthStar. Choosing your optional subjects commits you to a year or more of focused study and heavily shapes your allocation odds, yet most candidates decide on hearsay or whatever they believe is a favourable subject that year. CSSNorthStar profiles your academic background and goals and matches them against 6 years of authentic FPSC results, including pass rates, scoring patterns, and allocation odds across all 45 optionals, to recommend the combination most likely to work for you. Settle your subjects first, then prepare with conviction. Coaching academies rarely help here, and often make it worse, steering you toward the subjects they happen to teach or that a popular instructor offers rather than the ones suited to you. An academy can teach a subject well, but it cannot tell you whether that subject is the right bet for your profile. Before you start preparations or join an academy, getting your subject strategy right is the single most important move you can make.
Start with the free CSSNorthStar assessment →
Sheharyar Ahmad
Founder, CSSNorthstar
Sheharyar Ahmad graduated from LUMS with BSc. (Hons.) in 2010 and topped the CSS Exam 2012 on his first attempt. He is an officer of the Pakistan Administrative Service, having served in Gilgit-Baltistan, Punjab, and Federal governments. He was awarded the Fulbright Scholarship to pursue a Master in Public Policy and Data Analytics from USA in 2022.