Assessment Results
Sphaenorhynchus canga
Order:
Anura
Family:
Hylidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
Brazil
on:
20 Aug 2020
by:
AArk/ASG Brazil Assessment Workshop
Authors:
C.L. Assis, F.S.F. Leite and L.B. Nascimento
IUCN Global Red List:
Not Evaluated (NE)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Brazil
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
22
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.] | Not Evaluated (NE) | |
| 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? | No / unlikely | This species is known from its type locality in Chapada de Canga, in the municipality of Mariana-MG, southeastern part of the Quadrilátero Ferrífero. Recently, a new subpopulation was found in Barão de Cocais, about 30km from the type locality (C.L.Assis, pers. comm. 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? | No / unlikely | All known or nearby locations are non-protected and can become mined areas. |
| 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.). | Unknown | |
| 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 | Promote the creation of a protected area; Include in the licensing of new deposits and mines, a specific condition for in situ and ex situ actions to protect the species. |
| 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 is needed on natural history, reproduction, distribution, population size and trends. Although mining waste is not dumped into the lagoons, ecotoxicological studies by minerals would be important. |
| 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 unlikely to be reversed in time to prevent further decline / extinction | The main threat to this species is mining. According to Pena et al. (2020), five of the six lagoons where the species occurs are directly impacted by mining activities.(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319437735_Impacts_of_mining_activities_on_the_potential_geographic_distribution_of_eastern_Brazil_mountaintop_endemic_species) |
| 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 | |
| 13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | No | There is no specific plan for this species, but it is part of two National Action Plans: "Plano de Ação Nacional para a Conservação dos Répteis e Anfíbios Ameaçados de Extinção na Serra do Espinhaço" and "Plano de Ação Nacional para Conservação das Espécies Ameaçadas de Extinção da Ictiofauna, Herpetofauna e Primatas do Cerrado e Pantanal – CERPAN". |
| 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 | Information on reproduction, sexual maturity and longevity would be better to be obtained in captivity, but its conservation does not depend on it. |
| 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 | Sphaenorhynchus surdus or S. caramaschi |
| 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? | Maintained but no successful breeding | Fifteen years ago, tadpoles were kept in laboratory, but were difficult to metamorphose and died (F.S.F. Leite, pers. comm. 2020). Clodoaldo L. Assis (pers. comm. 2020) also kept five adults (males and females) for five months; individuals were euthanized. |
| 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 | This species is charismatic and presents pedomorphosis. It is also part of the DOTs Project, which aims to promote scientific communication and highlight conservation needs of the Brazilian threatened amphibians (https://www.projetodots.org). |
| 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:
C.L. Assis, F.S.F. Leite and L.B. Nascimento 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Sphaenorhynchus canga, Brazil
(AArk/ASG Brazil Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/6793
Accessed 19 May 2024
