Assessment Results
Oedipina quadra
Honduran Lowland Worm Salamander
Order:
Caudata
Family:
Plethodontidae
Synonym(s):
Thornella quadra
Assessed for:
Honduras
on:
15 Mar 2019
by:
AArk/ASG Assessment Workshop
IUCN Global Red List:
Vulnerable (VU)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Honduras, Nicaragua (Presence Uncertain)
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
17
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 | |
| 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 | The species is distributed from south La Ceiba (PN Pico Bonito and PN Nombre de Dios) to Quebrada Las María in Olancho, Parque Nacional Sierra de Agalta, las canoas y Río Cuaca in Olancho Departmet, eastern and southeastward to Río Coco drainage, Reserva de la Biósfera Río Plátano, La Mosquitia, in Colón and Gracias a Dios Departments (McCranie el al 2018 and HRL workshop participants 2019). In many protected but not well-managed areas. |
| 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 | Reserva Río Plátano, Gracias a Dios Department |
| 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.). | ||
| 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.)? | ||
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | ||
| 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 | In Pico Bonito the area from which this species was recorded is subject to extensive landslides; these often severely impact the species habitat. Additional major threats include deforestation as a result of agricultural and large-scale livestock encroachment, human settlements, selective logging of hardwoods, and human-induced fires (Honduras Red List Assessment Workshop March 2019). There is a proposal to shift the core parts both the Parque Nacional Pico Bonito and Parque Nacional Texiguat, which may create a much larger buffer zone where habitat conversion can progress unabated (C. Antúnez, J. Ramos Galdámez, J. Townsend pers. comm. March 2019). In Parque Nacional Nombre de Dios, the major threat is habitat destruction from are large-scale cattle ranching, small-scale oil palm plantations in the lower elevations (0-100 m asl), small-scale cacao plantations, selective logging for valuable hardwoods followed by clear-cutting, human-induced fires, and the building of roads (L. Herrera and J. Townsend pers. comm. March 2019). Cerro Correviento is unprotected forest, where the only forest that remains a patch of less than 1,500 hectares between 1,130-1,245 m asl, which is threatened by small-scale agriculture (crops), expanding human settlements, selective logging for valuable hardwoods followed by clear-cutting, human-induced fires and hunting trails and activities (L. Herrera and J. Townsend pers. comm. March 2019). In Sierra de Agalta the main threats to the species are forest fires, especially during extended dry seasons. The reform to the Ley de Protection de la Actividad Caficultora y Cacaotera (Decreto 37-2016; Articulos I, V, VI) has incentivised the cultivation of cacao in national lands, including the core zones of protected areas, which is increasing the alteration of primary forest (Honduras Red List Assessment Workshop March 2019). |
| 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? | Unknown | |
| 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? | Unknown | It is uncommon within its relatively wide range. In the Mosquito and Parque Nacional Pico Bonito is locally common (J. Ramos Galdámez and J.M. Sold pers. comm. March 2019) |
| 13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | ||
| 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? | ||
| 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.) | ||
| 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? | ||
| 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? | ||
| 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 | |
| 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? | ||
| 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. 2019. Conservation Needs Assessment for Oedipina quadra, Honduras.
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/4751
Accessed 30 Jan 2025
