Assessment Results
Odorrana livida
Green Cascade Frog, Green Mountain Frog, Large-eared Rock Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Ranidae
Synonym(s):
Polypedates lividus, Rana livida
Assessed for:
India
on:
15 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, Mohini Mohan Borah, Dr. Tutul Bortamuli, Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, Kaushik Deuti, H.T. Lalremsanga, Nikhil Modak, Jayanta Roy, Chatoan Tesia and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Data Deficient (DD)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India, Myanmar, Thailand
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
9.911288719
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? | No / unlikely | This species occurs in Thailand and Myanmar along their shared border from northwestern Thailand, through the Tenasserim Hills to southern peninsular Thailand (Mulcahy et al. 2018, Rujirawan et al. 2018) at elevations between 126 and 914 m asl (Anchalee Aowphol and Attapol Rujirawan pers. comm. July 2020). Records have been provided from West Bengal (Sarkar et al. 1992), Nagaland (Ao et al. 2003), Manipur (which was uncertain at publication - Devi and Shamungou 2006), and Lower Subansiri and East Kameng districts in Arunachal Pradesh (Saikia et al. 2018). Mathew and Sen (2010) also reported it in northeastern India from Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh , Nagaland, and West Bengal. However, many records assigned to this species actually represent undescribed congeners (Stuart et al. 2006). The presence of this species in Sikkim, India, is doubtful (Subba et al. 2016), and Indian records likely represent Odorrana chloronata (Anchalee Aowphol and Attapol Rujirawan pers. comm. July 2020). It is known with certainty in India from Assam, Manipur, Arunchal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Mizoram (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 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 | This is species is likely to occur in a number of protected areas, including Namdapha National Park and Nongkhyllem Wildlife Sanctuary (Meghalaya) (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 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.)? | 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 | The first step towards ensuring this species' long-term persistence is addressing the lack of data; additional surveys are needed to understand its true distribution, relative abundance, population trend, life history, and threats. |
| 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 | The threats to this species are not known. There is no evidence of its ability to adapt to agriculture, and has not been found in human habitation. The species is used for food (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. September 2020). Infrastructure, development for human settlement and agricultural expansion are threats to 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? | Unknown | This species is used as food (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 | This is a common and distinct species and therefore not easily confused (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, 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.)? | 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 | It is eaten locally. |
| 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 | It would make a good husbandry analog for other more threatened, related Ranids (Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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? | No | It is found very close to human habitation, and lives in very beautiful streams (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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)? | No | Research into species validity needs to be prioritised. The type material is lost and the locality information has been poorly recorded. A neotype has been designated. |
Citation:
Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, Mohini Mohan Borah, Dr. Tutul Bortamuli, Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, Kaushik Deuti, H.T. Lalremsanga, Nikhil Modak, Jayanta Roy, Chatoan Tesia and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Odorrana livida, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5628
Accessed 19 May 2024
