Assessment Results
Phrynobatrachus liberiensis
Liberia River Frog, Liberian Puddle Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Phrynobatrachidae
Synonym(s):
Cardioglossa liberiensis, Arthroleptis fraterculus
Assessed for:
Ghana
on:
20 Sep 2021
by:
AArk/ASG Ghana Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Adum, G., Kouamé, N.G., Ofori-Boateng, C. and Penner, J.
IUCN Global Red List:
Least Concern (LC)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
26.74530061
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) | Listed as Least Concern due to its wide distribution and presumed large population. However, the population is suspected to be decreasing due to ongoing decline in the quality and extent of the species' habitat and close attention should be paid to this and other forest-dependent species in West Africa. |
| 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 occurs in Kakum and Ankasa National Parks and in Sui River Forest Reserve in Ghana. |
| 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? | Unknown | In Ghana, this species is known from the south-west. There are a few suitable places in Ghana, including in Ankasa National Park, although many of these areas are heavily polluted by mining activities. |
| 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 occurs in several 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 | Ongoing and improved management of protected areas is required including forest restoration, enforcement of protected area boundaries, the provision of livelihood alternatives for locals to reducing mining activities, and additional resource provision for the protection of existing protected areas [e.g. equipment such as cars and fuel provision] (G. Adum and J. Penner pers. comm. September 2021). The protection of all remaining forest in the region is also required, as well as the protection of its freshwater habitats (N.G. Kouamé pers. comm. September 2021). |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | More research on its reproductive mode and the size, distribution and trend of its population is needed. |
| 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 only in forest, mostly in primary but sometimes also in good secondary forest with abundant leaf litter and is usually associated with swampy areas. It is unlikely that this species will tolerate much habitat loss, and it requires good canopy cover (J. Penner, pers. comm. September 2021). Habitat destruction caused by deforestation for agricultural expansion (including cacao plantations) and logging are the primary threats to this species. These activities include surface water extraction and drainage for agriculture. It is also threatened in Ghana by artisanal and large-scale gold mining (G. Adum, G. and J. Penner, pers. comm., 2021), which also contributes to forest loss and pollution in stream habitats (G. Adum, pers. comm., September 2021). Agrochemicals are heavily used in Ghana, including in farmland areas within the forests (G. Adum, pers. comm., September 2021). Hill sanctuaries across Ghana were more secure in 2009, but observations since 2016 have confirmed that habitat degradation and loss are now occurring within these areas (G. Adum, pers. comm., September 2021). Multiple threats currently exist in the Sui River Forest Reserve. Large-scale selective logging (both legally and illegally) and deforestation for cacao plantations (G. Adum, pers. comm., September 2021) - in 2021, the government allowed 15 ha of the 333.9 km² Sui River Forest Reserve to be cleared (G. Adum and J. Penner, pers. comm., September 2021). Other threats include the use of agrochemicals, gold mining, encroachment due to over-population, wildfires as a result of slash and burn activities and the spread of the invasive weed (Chromolaena odorata), (Ghana RLA/CNA assessment workshop, 2021). Individuals from Nigeria tested positive for Bd (Imasuen et al. 2011), suggesting that chytridiomycosis could be a threat to this species although no mortalities or ill effects have been observed and the identity of these individuals have not yet been confirmed. |
| 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 was previously a very common species in suitable habitat. It was more abundant between 2009-2015, however numbers have become considerably reduced since 2016 (G. Adum, pers. comm., 2021). It is very fragmented in Western Africa (N.G. Kouamé, pers. comm., September 2021). The ongoing decline in the quality and extent of its habitat is suspected to be causing the population to decrease at an unknown rate. |
| 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 | This species could be used for research on the evolutionary history of forests (J. Penner, pers. comm., September 2021). |
| 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 | This is a forest specialist and could be used as an analog for other more threatened species in the genus (Ghana RLA/CNA assessment workshop, 2021). |
| 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 | Could be used to educate people about the diversity of coloration in a species (J. Penner, pers. comm., September 2021). |
| 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:
Adum, G., Kouamé, N.G., Ofori-Boateng, C. and Penner, J. 2021. Conservation Needs Assessment for Phrynobatrachus liberiensis, Ghana
(AArk/ASG Ghana Assessment Workshop).
https://www.conservationneeds.org/assessment/6921
Accessed 21 May 2024
