Assessment Results
Indirana leithii
Order:
Anura
Family:
Ranixalidae
Synonym(s):
Rana leithii
Assessed for:
India
on:
25 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Krishna K, Gururaja K.V., Nikhil Modak and Dr. Anand Padhye
IUCN Global Red List:
Vulnerable (VU)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
26.46797068
Recommended Conservation Actions:
Additional Comments:
Listed in Gupta et al (2015) as a species for capacity-building at: V.J.B. Udyan Zoo, Byculla Mumbai.
| Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
| 1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Least Concern (LC) | Listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution and presumed large population. However, since this species depends on streams in areas of undisturbed forest habitat and there is ongoing decline in the extent and quality of its habitat due to widespread forest loss within its range, its population should be monitored. |
| 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 taxon is known with certainty only from the Western Ghats of Maharashtra State in India. It occurs in the localities of Matheran, Harishchandragad, Naneghat, Lonavla, Tamhini, Mahabaleshwar, and Koynanagar (Garg and Biju 2016, Modak et al. 2018). It has been recorded in the following Wildlife Sanctuaries of Maharashtra State: Bhimashankar, Chandoli, Kalsubai Harishchandragad Wildlife Sanctuary, Koyna National Park, and Phansad. It is also found in Ahwa-Dang from Gujarat (Modak, 2014), and is known to occur in Tamhini Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamhini-Sudhagad and Vansda National Park (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). It has an altitudinal range of 80-1,200m asl. |
| 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 | |
| 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.). | Yes / probably | It has been recorded in many protected areas. |
| 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 habitat protection is required, and regulation for the number of tourists visiting parks where this species occurs is recommended. |
| 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 the effects of Bd, and population monitoring, especially outside the type locality, are required. |
| 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 | The conversion of forested land to intensive agricultural use (slash and burn and shift cultivation) is a threat. Harvesting of wood for subsistence use by local people is a threat. The type locality (Matheran) is threatened by tourism development. Its range has reduced in size since the last assessment (Modak et al. 2014). Breeding habitats are threatened due to road widening activities, and road and rail mortalities due to the heat have been observed. Shift in breeding months has been observed due to delayed monsoon in the area (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). The type locality (Matheran) is threatened by tourism development (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). Linear infrastructure (road widening and railway tracks) proposed Pune-Nahik Railway Route and Kolhapur Ratnagiri track is a threat (Dr. Anand Padhye, pers. comm. September 2020). A shift in breeding season has been observed due to the shift in the monsoon pattern, related to climate change (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). The pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) has been identified as a threat to this taxon (Dahanukar et al. 2013). Temperature increases in between monsoon seasons has also resulted in observations of individuals of this species dying from desiccation (Dr. Anand Padhye, pers. comm. September 2020). The development of structures to prevent landslides which will affect the rock crevices habitats for this species (Nikhil Modak and Keerthi Krutha, 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? | Yes / probably | It is locally common, even in degraded forest areas. Very commonly found where they occur, especially at the type locality (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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.)? | Aspect of biology shared with < 6 other species | This species has no call in the audible range (the only such species in India) although there are a couple of other anurans which exhibit this behaviour (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). This species has semi-aquatic tadpoles that develop outside of waterbodies on wet rocks and mosses, and have long tails and hindlimbs which develop earlier compared to other anuran species (Nikhil Modak and K.V. Gururaja, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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? | Yes | Its specific breeding habit and lack of a call could make this a suitable species for conservation education (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). This species has semi-aquatic tadpoles which develop outside of waterbodies on wet rocks and mosses, which have long tails and their hindlimbs develop earlier compared to other anuran species (Nikhil Modak and K.V. Gururaja pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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:
Krishna K, Gururaja K.V., Nikhil Modak and Dr. Anand Padhye 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Indirana leithii, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5461
Accessed 18 May 2024
