Assessment Results
Boophis feonnyala
Order:
Anura
Family:
Mantellidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
Madagascar
on:
17 Jul 2019
by:
Devin Edmonds
IUCN Global Red List:
Endangered (EN)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Madagascar
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
24.62979596
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) | |
| 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? | Unknown | Known with certainty only from a tributary to the Sahatandra river that is within the protected areas of Analamazaotra Forest Station and Andasibe-Mantadia National Park (so all within a protected area), but the real distribution of the species may be greater than this tiny site where so far all individuals have been found. |
| 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 | Andasibe-Mantadia National Park / Analamazaotra / CAZ |
| 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.). | No / unlikely | |
| 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.)? | Unknown | |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Only known from a few individuals. More information on distribution, population status, basic natural history, etc. required to understand the species. |
| 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 unknown | Known only from one site but because it is difficult to detect and rarely found, it seems likely that it may in fact be more widespread than is known, making it hard to know the threats. |
| 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 | Not in trade. |
| 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 | Not known if population is declining, increasing or stable, and so the known population should be large enough to sustain itself naturally, as far as is known. |
| 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 | Not biologically distinct. |
| 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 | No significant cultural importance, although it was named after the hotel near the stream/lake where all sightings have occurred called Hotel Feon'ny Ala (conveniently also translates to "song of the forest") and the hotel has a picture of the frog up in its dining room. |
| 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 | Not scientifically important. |
| 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 | General life history traits might best be observed in captivity, but the species conservation probably does not depend on knowing this. |
| 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? | No | It is a species in the B. majori-group that may be the most restricted in known distribution of all. So far only known from an extremely tiny area, so probably other species would be better suited as analogs (potentially even as analogs for B. feonnyala if it is determined that its current known distribution is all there is) |
| 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? | No | Not especially colorful or charismatic or well-suited for exhibit. |
| 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 | The Sahonagasy Action Plan has been ratified by the Malagasy state and within it is an action to be able to establish ex situ programs for all amphibian species in Madagascar as needed. |
| 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 | Females would be very difficult to find, and calling males are already very rarely encountered, though with enough effort it might be possible to collect sufficient founder specimens. |
| 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 | See Glaw, F., Vences, M. Andreone, F., Vallan, D. 2001. Revision of the Boophis majori group (Amphibia: Mantellidae) from Madagascar, with descriptions of five new species. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 133: 495-529. |
Citation:
Devin Edmonds. 2019. Conservation Needs Assessment for Boophis feonnyala, Madagascar.
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/278
Accessed 31 Jan 2025
