Assessment Results
Stumpffia staffordi
Order:
Anura
Family:
Microhylidae
Synonym(s):
Rhombophryne staffordi
Assessed for:
Madagascar
on:
28 Oct 2015
by:
Jörn Köhler
IUCN Global Red List:
Vulnerable (VU)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Madagascar
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
24.12763
Recommended Conservation Actions:
Additional Comments:
| Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
| 1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Vulnerable (VU) | Probably restricted to very small range. S. staffordi occurs in an area flagged as a protected site. Nevertheless, forest destruction in this area is ongoing and has even intensified in the last years (D’Cruze et al. 2007, Köhler et al. 2010). On the other hand, because of their specialization to karstic habitat and partly caves, this largebodied Stumpffia are probably less affected by deforestation than other Malagasy frog species. However, species are prone to the effects of human activities or stochastic events, and are thus capable of becoming Critically Endangered or even Extinct in a very short time period. Because of severe and ongoing habitat alteration, we propose the status "Endangered" KÖHLER, J., M. VENCES, N. D'CRUZE & F. GLAW (2010): Giant dwarfs: discovery of a radiation of large-bodied 'stump-toed frogs' from karstic cave environments of northern Madagascar. Journal of Zoology 282 (1): 21–38. Changed to VU as per Rakotoarison et al (2017): AOO estimated to be < 10 km2. Locality is suffering from on-going habitat degradation and high anthropogenic pressure. |
| 2 | Possibly extinct | Is there a strong possibility that this species might be extinct in the wild? | No / unlikely | Nothing known about poputation status. Only 2 specimens collected. Habitat rather restricted (caves). |
| 3 | Phylogenetic significance | The taxon’s Evolutionary Distinctiveness (ED) score, as generated by the ZSL EDGE program. (These data are not editable by Assessors). | ED value 20 - 50 | |
| 4 | Protected habitat | Is a population of at least 50% of the individuals of the taxon included within a well-managed or reliably protected area or areas? | No / unlikely | The area of occurrence is flagged protected area, but alteration of the natural habitat is ongoing and has been intensified in last years. |
| 5 | Habitat for reintroduction, conservation translocation or supplementation | Does enough well-managed and reliably protected habitat exist, either within or outside of currently protected areas that is suitable for conservation translocation, including population restoration or conservation introduction? | Unknown | The question is whether this species does occur outside of caves. If not, the habitat is really restricted to few caves of Montagne des Francais. |
| 6 | Previous reintroductions | Have reintroduction or translocation attempts been made in the past for this species? | No | |
| 7 | In situ conservation activities | Are any in situ conservation actions currently in place for this species? (Only required if a Red List Assessment has not been completed, or if new actions have been implemented since the last Red List Assessment. (Information from the Conservation Actions section of the Red List assessment should be reviewed and considered when answering this question.). | ||
| 8 | In situ conservation activities | Are additional in situ conservation actions required to help conserve this species in the wild (e.g. habitat restoration and/or protection, control of invasive species, national legislation etc.)? | Yes / probably | Improved management and protection of Montagne des Francais |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Population size and trends, life history, threats |
| 10 | Threat mitigation | Are the threats facing the taxon, including any new and emerging threats not considered in the IUCN Red List, potentially reversible? | Threats unlikely to be reversed in time to prevent further decline / extinction | See above. Massive alteration of habitat going on. |
| 11 | Over-collection from the wild | Is the taxon suffering from collection within its natural range, either for food, for the pet trade or for any other reason, which threatens the species’ continued persistence in the wild? | No / unlikely | as far known not in trade. |
| 12 | Population recovery | Is the known population of this species in the wild large enough to recover naturally, without ex situ intervention if threats are mitigated? | Unknown | Nothing known on population status. |
| 13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | No | |
| 14 | Biological distinctiveness | Does the taxon exhibit a distinctive reproductive mode, behaviour, aspect of morphology or physiology, within the Order to which it belongs (e.g. Anura, Passeriformes etc.)? | No aspect of biology known to be exceptional | Cave-dwelling large-bodied species of Stumpffia. Reverse evolution of body size from small ancestors. Probably interesting reproductive biology. Changed to not exceptional by D. Edmonds 8/29/19 because there are more than 6 species within Anura with these traits |
| 15 | Cultural/socio-economic importance | Does the taxon have a special human cultural value (e.g. as a national or regional symbol, in a historic context, featuring in traditional stories) or economic value (e.g. food, traditional medicine, tourism) within its natural range or in a wider global context? | No | |
| 16 | Scientific importance | Is the species vital to current or planned research other than species-specific ecology/biology/conservation within the Order to which it belongs (e.g. Anura, Passeriformes etc.) e.g. human medicine, climate change, environmental pollutants and conservation science? | No research dependent on this species | |
| 17 | Ex situ research | Does conserving this species (or closely related species) in situ depend upon research that can be most easily carried out ex situ? | No | Probably not. Saving habitat is most important. |
| 18 | Ex situ conservation activities | Is any ex situ research or other ex situ conservation action currently in place for this species? (Information from the Conservation Actions section of the Red List assessment should be reviewed and considered when answering this question.) | No / unlikely | |
| 19 | Husbandry analog required | If an ex situ rescue program is recommended for this species, would an analog species be required to develop husbandry protocols first? | Unknown | |
| 20 | Husbandry analog | Do the biological and ecological attributes of this species make it suitable for developing husbandry regimes for more threatened related species? i.e. could this species be used in captivity to help to develop husbandry and breeding protocols which could be used for a similar, but more endangered species at a later stage? | Yes | Possibly yes, as there are more of these related species known from karstic caves. |
| 21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Not held in captivity to date | |
| 22 | Conservation education/ecotourism potential | Is the species especially diurnal, active or colourful, or is there an interesting or unusual aspect of its ecology that make it particularly suitable to be an educational ambassador for conservation of the species in the range country, either in zoos or aquariums or within ecotourism activities? | No | Not really, although it might be interesting to demonstrate this species as part of a particular Madagascan cave fauna. |
| 23 | Mandate | Is there an existing conservation mandate recommending the ex situ conservation of this taxon? | No | |
| 24 | Range State approval | If an ex situ initiative was proposed for this species, would it be supported (and approved) by the range State (either within the range State or out-of-country ex situ)? | No / unlikely | |
| 25 | Founder specimens | Are sufficient animals of the taxon available or potentially available (from wild or captive sources) to initiate an ex situ program, if one was recommended? | Unknown | Research into availability of founders needs to be prioritised. Population status not known. |
| 26 | Taxonomic status | Has a complete taxonomic analysis of the species in the wild been carried out, to fully understand the functional unit you wish to conserve (i.e. have species limits been determined)? | Yes | Identified by integrative taxonomic approach. Relationships almost clear. Forms a calde with other large-bodied species from karstic environments in the north of Madagascar.KÖHLER, J., M. VENCES, N. D'CRUZE |
Citation:
Jörn Köhler. 2015. Conservation Needs Assessment for Stumpffia staffordi, Madagascar.
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/3857
Accessed 18 May 2024
