Assessment Results
Leptobrachium rakhinensis
Order:
Anura
Family:
Megophryidae
Synonym(s):
Leptobrachium rakhinense
Assessed for:
India
on:
13 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi and Annemarie Ohler
IUCN Global Red List:
Endangered (EN)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Bangladesh, India, Myanmar
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
18.39698927
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.] | Least Concern (LC) | |
| 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 | |
| 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? | Unknown | Specimens from India and Bangladesh assigned to L. haseltii and L. smithii were identified as L. rakhinensis by Wogan (2012) indicating that the species may be widespread throughout the low elevation mountains across the region. However, this has been contested by Dutta et al. (2013). Dutta et al. (2013) contests that specimens in India are this species and instead allocates them to L. smithii, but for this assessment we are following Wogan (2012) in alignment with Frost (2020) and placing specimens from India in to this species (Annemarie Ohler, pers. comm. October 2020). The species is present in multiple reserve forests, biosphere reserves, national parks and tiger reserves, in the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Manipur in India (Dutta et al. 2013). In India it occurs from 30-1,750m asl, but primarily below 500m (Dutta et al. 2013). |
| 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 | The species is present in multiple reserve forests, biosphere reserves, national parks and tiger reserves, in the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Manipur in India (Dutta et al. 2013). |
| 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 | |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Addressing the lack of data is the first step towards ensuring this species' long-term survival. Thus further surveys and monitoring are warranted to determine the species' relative abundance and its true range. This work would also help identify threats, which would inform conservation decisions. |
| 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 are likely to be reversible in time frame to prevent further decline / extinction | If the species occurs in the Indian Assam Mountain ranges it may be affected by logging, which is active there (G. Wogan pers. comm. October 2014). Road construction and agriculture are major threats within parts of the Indian range (Annemarie Ohler, pers. comm. October 2020). Quarrying for stone has caused considerable disturbance in some areas of its distribution (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. October 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 | The size and trends of this species' population are unknown except that nine individuals were recorded from the species' range at the time of its description by Wogan (2012). Habitat disturbance by shifting agriculture is likely to be causing some decline in the species' population. In India its tadpoles are very conspicuous (Annemarie Ohler, pers. comm. October 2020). In India the population status is unknown, but it is known from at least 26 localities (Dutta et al. 2013 as L. smithii) suggesting that it is common. From one locality in India, 53 specimens were collected (Annemarie Ohler, pers. comm. October 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.)? | 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? | Unknown | Check with someone else. |
| 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 | This species is found close to a town, and students often visit the area to see the frogs (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. October 2020). It is also an attractive species with red eyes (Annemarie Ohler, pers. comm. October 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)? | Unknown | Research into species validity needs to be prioritised. (Listed in Dutta et al 2013 as L. smithii) |
Citation:
Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi and Annemarie Ohler 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Leptobrachium rakhinensis, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5500
Accessed 17 May 2024
