Assessment Results
Nyctibatrachus minimus
Miniature Night Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Nyctibatrachidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
23 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Sandeep Das, Keerthi Krutha and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Data Deficient (DD)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
24.11130187
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.] | Vulnerable (VU) | |
| 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? | Yes / probably | This species was previously only recorded from the general vicinity of Kurichiyarmala, in Wayanad District, Kerala, India, at 1,200 m asl (Biju et al. 2007), where it was known from seven subpopulations on the Wayanad Plateau (S.D. Biju, pers. comm.). It now also occurs in Honey Valley in Coorg District, Karnataka State (Badrinath 2015). It is also known from Malabar Wildlife Sanctuary, Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary, South Wayanad Forest Division, Thamarassery Ghats, Aralam Wildlife Sanctuary and Periya, North Wayanad Forest Division in Wayanad (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). It might be found to occur a little more widely, but it is probably endemic to Wayanad Plateau (S.D. Biju, pers. comm. and Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Biju et al. (2007) and Biju et al. (2011) provide two different sets of coordinates for the type locality. It occurs between 600- 1500m asl (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 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.). | No / unlikely | It has not been recorded from the Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary (S.D. Biju, pers. comm.). |
| 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. |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Surveys are needed to determine the distribution, abundance, ecological requirements, threats and conservation needs of this species. Further studies are required to investigate the full effect of pesticides and the effect of Bd on this species (India RLA/CNA workshop September 2020). |
| 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 | It can adapt to somewhat degraded forest. However, it is possible that serious opening up of the habitat for agriculture is detrimental to the species. There are cardamom, coffee and tea plantations in Wayanad which may be detrimental to the species due to opening up of the habitat for plantations (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). In the Meppady Chembra area, the species is found in all three types of plantations, and the use of pesticides in plantations could pose a threat to the species (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Recent floods and landslides definitely have an impact on the species, and these are likely to be an annual occurrence (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Climate change is likely to be a minor future threat as it could increase floods (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) has been confirmed in the genus, with morbidity observed but no mortalities to date, but further studies are required to investigate the full effects on this species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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 | It is a locally common species (S.D. Biju and Sandeep Das, pers. comm.). |
| 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 | This is the smallest frog in India (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 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? | Yes / probably | Could use Nyctibatrachus kempholeyensis as a potential husbandry analog species (Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. December 2020). |
| 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 | Potential flagship ranking: 4 (tourist), (Kanagavel et al. 2017). |
| 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:
Sandeep Das, Keerthi Krutha and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Nyctibatrachus minimus, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5613
Accessed 17 May 2024
