Assessment Results
Raorchestes kadalarensis
Order:
Anura
Family:
Rhacophoridae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
07 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
S.R. Ganesh, S.R. Chandramouli, Robin Suyesh and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Not Evaluated (NE)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
18.03724571
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.] | Endangered (EN) | Listed as Endangered because its extent of occurrence (EOO) is 1,607 km2, it occurs in five or fewer threat-defined locations, and there is continuing decline in the extent and quality of its habitat. |
| 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? | Yes / probably | This species is found in disturbed forest patches within tea plantations (Anamalai Tiger Reserve) and in streams in primary forest, where it has been observed on leaf litter (Zachariah et al. 2011, Robin Suyesh and S.R. Ganesh person. comm. 2020). It can tolerate a degree of habitat disturbance, but unlikely to tolerate severe habitat loss and disturbance (Robin Suyesh and S.R. Ganesh, pers. comm. October 2020). This bush frog is known from the type locality at Kadalar tea Estate, Idduki District, in the southern Western Ghats state of Kerala in India, at elevations of 1,393 m asl (Zachariah et al. 2011). It has also been found in Munnar Hills, between 1,300-1,500 m asl (Robin Suyesh, pers. comm. October 2020), Vellimalai in Srivilliputhur Wildlife Sanctuary, Kottamalai, Meghamalai Wildlife Sanctuary and Valparai in Anamalai Tiger Reserve, all in Tamil Nadu State, at ca. 1,700 m asl (S.R. Ganesh, pers. comm. October 2020). It is thought to be restricted to its known range (Robin Suyesh, 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 | Anamalai Tiger Reserve, Vellimalai Srivilliputhur Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghamalai Wildlife Sanctuary Tamil Nadu. |
| 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 species is found in Anamalai Tiger Reserve, Vellimalai Srivilliputhur Wildlife Sanctuary and Meghamalai Wildlife Sanctuary, all in Tamil Nadu. |
| 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 | Further research is required on its distribution, natural history and the effects of climate change and Bd. Population monitoring is also recommended. |
| 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 | This species is found in disturbed forest patches within tea plantations and in streams in primary forest (Zachariah et al. 2011, Robin Suyesh and S.R. Ganesh, pers. comm. October 2020). It can tolerate a degree of habitat disturbance, but it is unlikely this species for this species to tolerate severe habitat loss and disturbance. Clearance of vegetation to make pathways for workers within plantations is considered a minor threat in parts of it range (S.R. Ganesh and Robin Suyesh pers. comm. October 2020). Pesticide use could be another another threat (S.R. Ganesh and Robin Suyesh, pers. comm. October 2020). Climate change is a potential future threat which could result in habitat shifting, and subpopulations that already exist in high elevations may be lost as they have no suitable habitat to migrate to (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 2020). Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) has been found in other species of the genus, so chytridiomycosis may be a potential threat for this species but further research is required (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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 | It is a fairly uncommon species but found even in bushy areas (Robin Suyesh, 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? | Yes / probably | Raorchestes beddomii or R. ponmudi could be potential husbandry analogs for this species, if needed (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? | 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)? | Yes |
Citation:
S.R. Ganesh, S.R. Chandramouli, Robin Suyesh and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Raorchestes kadalarensis, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5678
Accessed 19 May 2024
