Assessment Results
Incilius cristatus
Large-crested Toad
Sapo Cresta Grande
Order:
Anura
Family:
Bufonidae
Synonym(s):
Bufo occipitalis, Cranopsis cristata, Ollotis cristata, Bufo cristatus
Assessed for:
Mexico
on:
25 Apr 2020
by:
AArk/ASG Assessment Workshop
IUCN Global Red List:
Endangered (EN)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Mexico
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
8.161400542
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.] | Endangered (EN) | Listed as Endangered because its extent of occurrence (EOO) is 4,983 km2, its population is considered to be severely fragmented, and there is continuing decline in the area and quality of its habitat in Puebla and Veracruz. This species has recently been recorded again after a long period with few observations, and new information has been found relating to the distribution of this species, thereby expanding its known range, and increasing the EOO beyond the CR thresholds. |
| 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 species is found in the central Sierra Madre Oriental, Mexico, in the states of Puebla and Veracruz, between |
| 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 | |
| 6 | Previous reintroductions | Have reintroduction or translocation attempts been made in the past for this species? | Yes, but outcome is unknown | There were introduced several individuals from 2014 and on going. Just few marked individuals have been recaptured so far. |
| 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 | A consortium of partners are working on establishing a captive breeding program and developing an education (Guardianes del Bosque) and awareness campaign for this species (Kapoor 2008). Apulco is a small area informally protected by a local community as well as two small areas close to Huatusco and Coscomatepec, Veracruz are protected by private initiatives. Environmental education at Barranca de Xocoyolo, Puebla |
| 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 | Protection of the original cloud forest fragments where this species persists are needed, as are measures to address the pollution of streams from anthropogenic activities. While this species is currently protected in some areas by local communities, the governance protected status, and/or management practices of these areas could change in the near future (Mexico Red List Assessment Workshop October 2019). |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | There is a need to explore other forest fragments that could harbor additional subpopulations. |
| 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 | The disappearance and disturbance of cloud forests are the major threats to this species, as cloud forest has been described as one of the most threatened habitat types in Mexico (Ochoa-Ochoa et al. 2017). The pollution and desiccation of streams may also be a relevant threat. The habitat has been completely destroyed in some localities where this species formerly occurred, partly due to urban development and expanding human settlements. |
| 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 | Historically, this was was rarely observed in the field and has been referred to as an enigmatic species (Mendelson 1998). In 1995, after 25 without any observations, the species was collected near Apulco, Puebla (Mendelson and Canseco-Márquez 1998) and, subsequently, in 1998 it was recorded near the type locality of Xalapa, Veracruz (Pineda and Halffter 2004). Multiple surveys at the same localities in the following years, however, were not successful in recording the species again and the species was believed to be extinct. In recent years, the species documented in Barranca de Xocoyolo, Puebla (Vázquez-Corzas 2012) and in 2010, individuals from this subpopulation were collected as founders for a captive colony (Hernández-Díaz 2013). In the summer of 2010, the species was recorded near Huatusco and Coscomatepec, Veracruz (unpubl. data In: Oropeza-Sánchez et al. 2018), and during 2012-2014. Clause et al. (2015) reported several toads in four sites near Atzalan, Veracruz. In 2012, adults of the species were again observed near Huatusco and Coscomatepec (Meza-Parral and Pineda 2015), as well as, near Chichiquila, Puebla (Nochebuena-Alcázar pers. comm. In: Oropeza-Sánchez et al. 2018), a new locality for the species. In all these instances, only a few adults were detected. In 2015, two individuals were recorded in the community of Tepexilotla, municipality of Chocamán (Luis pers. comm. Oct 2019). Between May and November 2013, a total of 172 toads were recorded in four localities (ranging from 6-129 per locality) in Veracruz and Puebla, with a sampling effort of 1,000 person-hours (Oropeza-Sánchez et al. 2018). |
| 13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | Yes - currently being developed | José Alfredo Hernández |
| 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.) | Yes / probably | Assurance population held at Africam Safari |
| 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 | For other Incillus species |
| 21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Yes, bred to F1 | At Africam Safari, Puebla. |
| 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? | No | |
| 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:
AArk/ASG Assessment Workshop. 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Incilius cristatus, Mexico.
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/1191
Accessed 05 Feb 2025
