Assessment Results
Uperodon triangularis
Triangle-spotted Ramanaella, Malabar Dot Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Microhylidae
Synonym(s):
Callula triangularis, Ramanella triangularis, Ramanella triangularis
Assessed for:
India
on:
14 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Nikhil Modak, Sandeep Das, Vishnupriya Sankararaman and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Vulnerable (VU)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
22.04922416
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) | Listed as Vulnerable, because its extent of occurrence is 16,705 km2, it likely occurs in 10 or fewer threat-defined locations, and there is a 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 - 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 believed to be restricted to the southern Western Ghats, Ponmudi Hills (Kerala and Tamil Nadu), Wayanad and the Silent Valley (Kerala), Malabar Wildlife Sanctuary (Kerala), and Saklespur, Hassan District (Karnataka) in India. It has been recorded from Waynad Wildlife Sanctuary and Silent Valley National Park, both in Kerala, which form part of the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve. It also occurs in Ooty in Tamil Nadu State, Kalpetta, Mananthavady, Pozhuthana and Suganthagiri in northern Kerala State, and Bygoor, Madikeri, Mudigere, and Wattakoli in southern Karnataka State (Garg et al. 2018). This frog occurs the South Indian states of Kerala, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, north of Palghat Gap (Garg et al. 2018). The distribution record in the Shevaroys Hills of the Eastern Ghats, as reported in Dutta (1997), requires further confirmation. It occurs between 675 and 2,200 m asl (Garg et al. 2018). |
| 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 | Chikmagalur and Coorg districts in Karnataka (Vishnupriya Sankararaman, pers. comm. September 2020) and Malabar Wildlife Sanctuary, Kozhikode Forest Division in Kerala (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 has been recorded from Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary and Silent Valley National Park, both in Kerala, which form part of the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve. |
| 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 | Research on its taxonomy and population, and the effects of Bd are required. |
| 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 has been found in tropical moist evergreen and deciduous forests, and coffee plantations with a natural canopy cover. It may also be found in abandoned eucalyptus plantations close to forest. The major threat to this species is habitat loss due to conversion to agricultural land (including coffee plantations) and human settlements; it does not require primary forest and seem to do well in plantations with intact canopy cover, and will not tolerate the complete opening up of its habitat (Vishnupriya Sankararaman, pers. comm. September 2020). Bd is present with this species' range, and may be a threat but further studies are 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 | No records of utilization. |
| 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 locally common species (Vishnupriya Sankararaman, 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 | Quite arboreal relative to congneric species (Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. September 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 | Uperodon variegatus would be the appropriate analogue for this species (Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. September 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 | Yes, potential as breeding sites are established and tadpoles are easy to see (Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. 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. When the first assessment for this species was published (in 2004) it was under the generic name Ramanella. Ramanella RaoCould be a species complex (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). |
Citation:
Nikhil Modak, Sandeep Das, Vishnupriya Sankararaman and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Uperodon triangularis, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/5730
Accessed 18 May 2024
