Assessment Results
Microhyla nilphamariensis
Nilphamarai Narrow-mouthed Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Microhylidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
01 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Nikhil Dandekar, S.R. Ganesh, Krishna Komanduri, Garg, S., Gururaja K.V., Annemarie Ohler, Dr Anand Padhy, Harshil Patel, Prudhvi Raj Gunturu, Seshadri K.S., Chelmala Srinivasulu, Shauri Sulakhe and S.R. Chandramouli
IUCN Global Red List:
Not Evaluated (NE)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Bangladesh, India, Nepal
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
19
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 | This frog is widely distributed in Southern Asia, with records in Bangladesh, India and central and eastern Nepal (Garg et al. 2019). In India, it is known from Rajghat in Uttar Pradesh, Maneri, Tuntowala and Dehradum in Uttarakhand, Balugaon in Odisha, Koyna, Amboli, Neral, Pune and Phansad Wildlife Sanctuary in Maharashtra, Madayipara, Mannuthy, Kakkayam, Anakallu in Kerala State, Jog, Manipal, Mangauru, Kathelekan, Castle Rock, Talagini, Karmoor and Bajipe in Karnataka State, Bawana in Delhi State, Durga Dhara in Chattisgarh State, Kaitha in Bihar State, Mazgaon and Mandia in Assam State, and Srikakulam in Andhra Pradesh (Garg et al. 2018a, Garg et al. 2019). It may occur more widely in Maharashtra, India (India Red List Assessment Workshop August 2020), and surveys are required to determine the eastern limits of its distribution in northeast India where it starts to overlap with other species in the genus (S. Garg pers. comm. March 2021). It is present in several protected areas throughout its range (IUCN and UNEP-WCMC 2020). |
| 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 is present in several protected areas throughout its range (IUCN and UNEP-WCMC 2020). |
| 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 (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). |
| 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 into taxonomy, distribution, population and ecology is reuqired. |
| 10 | Threat mitigation | Are the threats facing the taxon, including any new and emerging threats not considered in the IUCN Red List, potentially reversible? | Species does not require conservation action at this time | It may tolerate some levels of habitat disturbance (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). It can be found on the outskirts of urban areas (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). Habitat alteration and loss, and urbanization in the Western Ghats and Central India are considered to be threats to this species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). Road mortality is also likely to be a threat (Seshadri KS and Dr Anand Padhy pers. comm August 2020) and the development of a railway line in Castle Rock is underway and is a threat to this species (India Red List Assessment Workshop August 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 found in good numbers and considered to be common (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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? | 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 | Can be easily bred in captivity (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). |
| 21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Maintained but no successful breeding | Protocols for captive breeding other microhylids are well established. It is used extensively for research in laboratories, as well as educational and outreach activities in India. |
| 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)? | No | Research into species validity needs to be prioritised. This could be a species complex (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). This species was previously in Microhyla ornata, but is now only in southern Western Ghats (Annemarie Ohler, pers. comm. October 2020). |
Citation:
Nikhil Dandekar, S.R. Ganesh, Krishna Komanduri, Garg, S., Gururaja K.V., Annemarie Ohler, Dr Anand Padhy, Harshil Patel, Prudhvi Raj Gunturu, Seshadri K.S., Chelmala Srinivasulu, Shauri Sulakhe and S.R. Chandramouli 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Microhyla nilphamariensis, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5552
Accessed 14 May 2024
