Assessment Results
Craugastor berkenbuschii
Berkenbusch's Robber Frog
Rana-ladrona De Berkenbusch
Order:
Anura
Family:
Craugastoridae
Synonym(s):
Eleutherodactylus berkenbuschii
Assessed for:
Mexico
on:
27 Apr 2020
by:
AArk/ASG Assessment Workshop
IUCN Global Red List:
Least Concern (LC)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Mexico
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
20.00211102
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) | Changes to LC in view of its relatively wide distribution, tolerance of a degree of habitat modification and presumed large population. |
| 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? | No / unlikely | This species occurs from the Atlantic foothills and slopes of southeastern San Luis Potosí and northern Veracruz, including eastern portions of Hidalgo and Puebla, to northern Oaxaca and through southeastern Oaxaca and Veracruz to the isthmus of Tehuantepec in Mexico. Additional records from Minatitlán and Coatzacoalcos have been reported, extending the range further into southeastern Veracruz (Carmona-Torres 2013). |
| 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? | 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.)? | Yes / probably | Cloud forest has been described as one of the most threatened habitat types in Mexico (Ochoa-Ochoa et al. 2017). Thus, improved habitat protection is required at sites where this species is known to occur. |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | No | |
| 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 major threat for this species is the intense and rapid disappearance of cloud forests and tropical forests. There are documented declines in the state of Veracruz due to disturbance and loss of the habitat resulting from the expansion of large-scale cattle ranching (L. Canseco-Márquez and O. Hernández pers. comm. October 2019). Agriculture and logging within the species range are also likely contributing to the loss of habitat. In the former assessment (2004), it was thought that this species could be declining due to chytridiomycosis, however currently this idea has been discarded. |
| 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 | This is a common species in conserved forest habitats (e.g., Los Chimalapas), although it was documented in 2004 that it had disappeared from some sites Oaxaca and central Veracruz, Mexico. In northern Oaxaca, three individuals were recorded in 2018 and the species is considered to be naturally rare (L. Canseco-Márquez pers. comm. October 2019). A healthy subpopulation was recorded in Los Chimalapas in Oaxaca on the border with Veracruz in 2018 (O. Hernández pers. comm. October 2019). While the species has been recorded recently in Oaxaca and Veracruz, there have been no recent surveys of this species in San Luis Potosi (L. Canseco-Márquez and O. Hernández pers. comm. October 2019) and the species has not been recorded despite surveys in Hidalgo in 2017-2019 (A. Fernandez Badillo pers. comm. October 2019). A good population was recorded in Oaxaca Los Chimalapas in the border of Veracruz in 2018 (Omar Hernández pers. comm. October 2019). |
| 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 | |
| 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 | |
| 21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Maintained but no successful breeding | Iván Ahumada (pers. comm. October 2019) |
| 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 Craugastor berkenbuschii, Mexico.
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5319
Accessed 31 Jan 2025
