Assessment Results
Raorchestes ponmudi
Large Ponmudi Bush Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Rhacophoridae
Synonym(s):
Philautus ponmudi, Philatus sp. nov. 'Ponmudi 3', Pseudophilautus ponmudi
Assessed for:
India
on:
09 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Keerthi Krutha, Nikhil Modak, Rajkumar K.P., Seshadri K.S. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Critically Endangered (CR)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
20.6172008
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 - 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 known only from the type locality at 1,000 m asl on Ponmudi Hill, part of the Agasthyamala Hill range (=Ashambu Hills) in the Western Ghats of India. It has now been found in Kerala at Gavi, Kalpetta, Mananthavady, Sulthan’s Battery, Vagaman (Biju and Bossuyt 2009), Parambikulam Tiger Reserve (Jobin and Nameer 2012), in Banasura dam area, Wayannad, Kerala (Seshadri KS, pers. comm. October 2020), and Anamada in the Nelliyampathy Hills of Palakkad District (Afthab et al. 2018); Tamil Nadu at Valparai (Biju and Bossuyt 2009, Harikrishnan et al. 2018), and Meghamalai (Srinivas and Bhupathy 2013); Karnakata in Agumbe Rainforest Research Station in Agumbe Reserve forest (Purushotham and Tapley 2011), Rajiv Gandhi National Park (Krishna and Sreeada 2012), Sharavathi River basin in Uttara Kannada District (Ramachandra et al. 2012), and Honey Valley in Coorg District (Badrinath 2015). It has also been found in Periyar Tiger Reserve (Rajkumar KP, pers. comm. October 2020). It might be present in Shenduruny Sanctuary and Wynaad Wildlife Sanctuary. It might occur between known localities, but records north of the Palghat Gap are uncertain and further research is required to verify their identity (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. October 2020). Records for Rajiv Gandhi National Park, Talacauvery Wildlife Sanctuary and Wayanaad Wildlife Sanctuary require further verification (Keerthi Krutha, pers. comm, October 2020). It ranges between 600 and 1,000 m asl (Biju and Bossuyt 2009). |
| 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 species is present in and around a number of protected areas. |
| 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 | Strengthening the existing protected areas network and maintenance of remaining habitat in the range of the species are recommended conservation actions. Conservation outside protected areas is recommended (Afthab et al. 2018). Syamili and Nameer (2018) state the importance of human-modified habitats in the conservation of anurans in the Western Ghats (Afthab et al. 2018). |
| 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, taxonomy on the subpopulations north of the Palghat Gap, and the effects of Bd and climate change. 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 bush frog also lives in evergreen forest patches, coffee and tea plantations near forest fringes, and shola (Biju and Bossuyt 2009, Afthab et al. 2018). It was observed under a fallen log on a forest path within a montane forest, and near a stream with dense Cyathea sp. ferns flowing through patches of montane forests in the proximity of tea plantations (Chandramouli and Ganesh 2010). The habitat of this species is known to be declining, and the expansion of surrounding tea plantations is likely to exacerbate the rate of forest loss. It is likely to be tolerant to a degree of habitat disturbance (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 2020). Habitat conversion to large-scale plantations (tea and rubber) is a major threat to this species, and the use of pesticides may be a threat. Climate change could be a future potential threat, with extended dry periods causing problems for this species, which is dependent on moisture. Bd has been confirmed in the genus and in southern Western Ghats, but further studies are required to investigate the full effects on this species (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 common species and is frequently encountered in Ponmudi (Keerthi Krutha, 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? | 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 | Could be a potential husbandry analog for other more threatened Raorchestes species (Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. December 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? | Yes | Potential flagship ranking: 1 (conservation practitioner), (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:
Keerthi Krutha, Nikhil Modak, Rajkumar K.P., Seshadri K.S. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Raorchestes ponmudi, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5690
Accessed 16 May 2024
