Assessment Results
Atelopus chiriquiensis
Lewis' Stubfoot Toad
Order:
Anura
Family:
Bufonidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
Costa Rica
on:
17 Apr 2020
by:
AArk/ASG Assessment Workshop
IUCN Global Red List:
Extinct (EX)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Costa Rica, Panama
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
6.624315187
William E. Duellman © 2010 Division of Herpetology, University of Kansas (1 of 2)
Recommended Conservation Actions:
Additional Comments:
Suggested for ex situ management in the case a population is found.
| Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
| 1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Extinct (EX) | Listed as Extinct because it has not been recorded since 1996, and extensive searches in the appropriate habitat, during the appropriate season within the known range, have failed to locate this species. |
| 2 | Possibly extinct | Is there a strong possibility that this species might be extinct in the wild? | Yes / probably | This species was once considered locally abundant along streams (Lindquist and Swihart 1997, Lips 1998). In Costa Rica this species has disappeared from its entire range, and there have been no sightings since 1996, despite many searches in appropriate montane habitats (Leenders 2001, Garcia-Rodriguez 2012, F. Bolaños pers. comm, September, 2019). Current survey effort low, but still it seems species has disappeared from Costa Rica (Diego Gómez pers. comm. 2019). There are historical sites that requires additional surveys, although since 2014, 15 peaks within the historical range has been explore and search for the species without detection (G. Chávez, pers. comm. Sept 2019). Despite of extensive surveys at Chiripó National Park result on no specimen found (F. Bolaños pers. comm.) F. Bolaños recently visited Cerro de la Muerte in August 2019 with no luck finding the species. The southwestern population (Las Tablas) has been regularly surveyed have not observed the species (D. Gómez and F. Bolaños, pers. comm. Sept. 20019) |
| 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 | |
| 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 | This species has disappeared from its range, but was previously found in the lower montane zone of the Cordillera de Talamanca-Chiriqui axis of Costa Rica. The range of the species is within the protected areas of Parque Nacional Chiripó, Zona Protectora Las Tablas, Zona Protector Los Santos, and Parque Internacional La Amistad. |
| 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? | Yes / probably | In former natural distribution |
| 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.). | No / unlikely | |
| 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.)? | No / unlikely | |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | No | |
| 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 | Bd was confirmed in this species in 1993 and 1994 (see Lipset al. 2003). The resulting decline of this species occurred over a five year period between 1992-1996 and has been linked to chytridiomycosis (Lips 1998). Climate change or the synergistic effects of multiple factors cannot be ruled out as playing a role in the declines (Costa Rica Red List Assessment Workshop September 2019). Tadpoles of this species may possibly have been threatened by exotic predatory trout, but the severity of this threat remains unknown (Costa Rica Red List Assessment Workshop September 2019). |
| 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 | There are no records of this species being utilized. |
| 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? | No / unlikely | This species was once considered locally abundant along streams (Lindquist and Swihart 1997, Lips 1998) and was formerly a very easy species to find (F. Bolaños pers. comm. September 2019). In Costa Rica, this species has disappeared from its entire range, and there have been no sightings since 1996, despite many searches in appropriate montane habitats since its disappearance (Leenders 2001, Garcia-Rodriguez 2012, F. Bolaños pers. comm. September 2019). |
| 13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | No | But there is a general National Action Plan for threatened species of Costa Rica - 2007 |
| 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 | |
| 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 | |
| 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? | No / unlikely | |
| 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? | No | |
| 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 | |
| 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)? | Yes / probably | |
| 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? | No / unlikely | |
| 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 |
Citation:
AArk/ASG Assessment Workshop. 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Atelopus chiriquiensis, Costa Rica.
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5106
Accessed 18 May 2024
