Assessment Results
Duttaphrynus hololius
Günther's Toad, Malabar Toad
Order:
Anura
Family:
Bufonidae
Synonym(s):
Bufo hololius
Assessed for:
India
on:
27 Aug 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Krishna Komanduri, S.R. Ganesh, Chelmala Srinivasulu, Gururaja K.V. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Data Deficient (DD)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
8.963401806
Recommended Conservation Actions:
Additional Comments:
This species has been identified as a target amphibian species for ex-situ management (Gupta et al. 2015).
| 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 species is known from above 200 m asl in a small number of widely separated localities in Chittor and Nellore (Satyamurti 1967), and Nagarjuna Sagar Tiger Reserve (Pillai and Ravichandran 1986), in the state of Andhra Pradesh in southern India. It is also present in Tamil Nadu State at Devarabetta in Hosur District (Chandramouli et al. 2011), Thommaguddai and Kundu Reddiyur in Vellore District, and Gingee in Villupuram District (Kalaimani et al. 2012), and Andhra Pradesh at Nagarjunasagar in Nalgonda District (Adimallaiah et al. 2012, Srinivasulu et al. 2013). It seems likely for this taxon to have a wider distribution extending to southern parts of peninsular India and the Deccan Plateau, including southern Maharashtra bordering Karnataka, most of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, the eastern coast of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, and southern parts of Andhra Pradesh (Srinivasulu et al. 2013). It is also known from Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve (S.R. Ganesh, pers. comm. August 2020) and Mahaboobnagar and Hyderabad in Telangana (Ganesh et al. 2020). Intervening areas are devoid of records, though it might yet be found more widely. Its occurrence in the Western Ghats requires further clarification. It ranges between 0-880 m asl (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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? | Yes / probably | |
| 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 | It has been recorded from many protected areas including Nagarjuna Sagar Tiger Reserve in Andhra Pradesh (Pillai and Ravichandran 1996). |
| 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.)? | No / unlikely | |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Additional survey work on the geographic range of this taxon is needed (Srinivasulu et al. 2013). Research on taxonomy and population is also required. |
| 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 | A major threat to this species is small-scale stone quarrying, including blasting. Urbanization is also a problem in very urban areas of Hyderabad and Bangalore (Krishna K., pers. comm. August 2020). It is not very tolerant of habitat loss (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). |
| 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 reasonably common, but patchily distributed species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). |
| 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? | Yes | This could be a good husbandry analog for Bufoides meghalayanus and Duttaphrynus beddomei (Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. December 2020). |
| 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? | Yes | This is probably the only known endemic amphibian in this region, so could be used a flagship species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 2020). |
| 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)? | No | Research into species validity needs to be prioritised. This species occurs in disjunct habitat and is likely to be a species complex (S.R. Ganesh, pers. comm. August 2020). |
Citation:
Krishna Komanduri, S.R. Ganesh, Chelmala Srinivasulu, Gururaja K.V. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Duttaphrynus hololius, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5413
Accessed 31 Jan 2025
