Assessment Results
Boana buriti
Order:
Anura
Family:
Hylidae
Synonym(s):
Hypsiboas buriti, Hyla buriti, Hyla buriti
Assessed for:
Brazil
on:
19 Aug 2020
by:
AArk/ASG Brazil Assessment Workshop
Authors:
R.A. Brandão
IUCN Global Red List:
Data Deficient (DD)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Brazil
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
15.50458872
Recommended Conservation Actions:
Additional Comments:
Need to review the national conservation status of the species.
| Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
| 1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Data Deficient (DD) | |
| 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? | No / unlikely | This is species is know only for three areas: Fazenda Água Limpa (Brasília-DF, within University of Brasília - UnB); Fazenda Champion (Paracatu – MG); and Fazenda São Miguel (type locality, Buritis – MG) (Braga, L.R.A.B.; Brandão, R.A. & Colli, G.R. 2010. Amphibia, Anura, Hylidae, Hypsiboas buriti (Caramaschi and Cruz, 1999): Distribution update and map. Check List, 6: p.232-233). At Fazenda Água Limpa it was considered common. However, it has not been observed in recent years. It was also no longer observed in the type locality, where its habitat was removed after the installation of central irrigation pivots (R. Brandão, 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 | Even though it is not an effectively protected area, Fazenda Água Limpa is well maintained by UnB and has adequate environments for possible reintroduction (large ponds at the top of the plateaus). Most of the areas that are suitable for the occurrence of the species have already been converted to agriculture. |
| 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 | The environments inside Fazenda Água Limpa are being protected (2500ha). |
| 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 | Habitat recomposition, recategorization of protected areas, fire and invasive plant control. |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Monitoring the population of Fazenda Água Limpa - acoustic monitoring and photo ID; search for other subpopulations that were known; mapping of other possible occurrence sites; population viability study (genetics); population trends studies; studies with pesticides; and tadpole description. |
| 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 threats for this species are: conversion of native areas by mechanized agriculture; natural habitats replaced by central irrigation pivots; reduction of the water table level by using water for agriculture; underground fire in peat soil locations in veredas areas; entry of fire-related invasive plants (Trembleya spp, Macaraea spp. (Melastomataceae)); habitat loss due to land use; and climate change. |
| 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 | |
| 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 | It is necessary to assess the feasibility of keeping a backup population in captivity. |
| 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 | Boana stenocephala (LC) |
| 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 | Only tadpoles were kept in captivity for about a month (R.A. Brandão, pers. comm. 2020) |
| 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 very charismatic, commonly know as pajamas treefrog. 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:
R.A. Brandão 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Boana buriti, Brazil
(AArk/ASG Brazil Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/1144
Accessed 12 Feb 2025
