Assessment Results
Gegeneophis tejaswini
Tejaswini Geg
Order:
Gymnophiona
Family:
Indotyphlidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
03 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Varad Bhagwan Giri, Venu Govindappa, Dave Gower and Ramachandran Kotharambath
IUCN Global Red List:
Not Evaluated (NE)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
27.60338525
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.] | Data Deficient (DD) | |
| 2 | Possibly extinct | Is there a strong possibility that this species might be extinct in the wild? | No / unlikely | |
| 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 | This caecilian is only known from the type locality in Bedoor, Kasaragod District, in the state of Kerala in India (Kotharambath et al. 2015). It is likely to occur more widely than is currently known. It is not present in protected areas (IUCN and UNEP-WCMC 2020). It has been recorded at approximately 50 m asl (Kotharambath et al. 2015). |
| 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 | |
| 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.)? | Unknown | |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Research on its distribution, general ecology and reproductive biology is recommended (Kotharambath et al. 2015). |
| 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 unknown | No major threats have been identified for this species, which seems to tolerate certain agricultural habitats (Kotharambath et al. 2015). The conversion of land to agriculture and the increased use of fertilizers, along with urbanization, are threats to this species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). There has been an increase in population in the region in which the species occurs which is increasing development (Ramachandran Kotharambath, pers. comm. September 2020). It requires moist soil and the loss of ground water and streams due to development is a problem. It is often found close to streams, which are disappearing, and houses are being built in the area (Ramachandran Kotharambath, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 | |
| 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 | Kotharambath et al. (2015) consider this taxon not very abundant following surveilling efforts carried out in four separate occasions between 2008 and 2010. |
| 13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | Yes - currently being developed | |
| 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.) | Yes / probably | A conservation breeding program is underway (2020). |
| 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? | Yes | The results of husbandry research which is underway in 2020 could be applied to other species in the genus (Dave Gower, pers. comm. September 2020) |
| 21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Maintained but no successful breeding | Held in captivity by Dr Ramachandran Kotharambath, Assistant Professor, Central University of Kerala (2020). |
| 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? | Yes / probably | |
| 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:
Varad Bhagwan Giri, Venu Govindappa, Dave Gower and Ramachandran Kotharambath 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Gegeneophis tejaswini, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5437
Accessed 19 May 2024
