Assessment Results
Duttaphrynus microtympanum
Small-eared Toad, Southern Hill Toad
Order:
Anura
Family:
Bufonidae
Synonym(s):
Bufo microtympanum
Assessed for:
India
on:
21 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Sandeep Das, Nikhil Modak and S.R. Ganesh
IUCN Global Red List:
Vulnerable (VU)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
9.209713468
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.] | Near Threatened (NT) | At the time of re-assessment, no new information was available that would warrant a change in the category. However, this species would not have qualified for Vulnerable if an EOO had been calculated for the last assessment, rather than estimated, as the EOO of the distribution was - and is - too large for the thresholds of this category. In addition, this reassessment follows the Red List Guidelines Version 11 (2014) and later versions, which encourage the use of a minimum convex polygon to estimate extent of occurrence (EOO) for criterion B assessments (i.e. without excluding areas forming discontinuities or disjunctions). Calculating the EOO according to these Guidelines has resulted in a downlisting from Vulnerable to Near Threatened. |
| 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? | Yes / probably | This species is now known to occur in the states of Kerala, Tamil Nadu (Dutta 1997, Krishna and Sreepada 2012) in India. In Kerala, it is known from Thannikkudy in Periyar Tiger Reserve, Eravikulam National Park, Periyar Tiger Reserve, Chinnar Wildlife Sanctuary, Anamudi Shola National Park, Pampadum shola National Park, Mathikettan Shola National Park (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). In Tamil Nadu, it occurs at Vellimalai, Meghamalai landscape (Srinivas and Bhupathy 2013), Meghamalai Wildlife Sanctuary (Chaitanya et al. 2018, SR Ganesh, pers. comm. October 2020), Murugalli-Black Bridge, Valparai in the Anamalai Hills (Harikrishnan et al. 2018). It occurs between 1,000-2,695 m asl. There are records from Wayanad District in Sairandri in Silent Valley National Park, Tholpetty in Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary (Andrews et al. 2005) in Kerala, however this needs to be confirmed with surveys (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). It is likely to be restricted to its known range, but may occur between its known localities (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). It ranges between 500 m asl (Andrews et al. 2004) and 2,100 m asl. An additional record is labeled Bufo cf. microtympanum in Kulathupuzha, Kollam District, Kerala State, by Jose et al. (2014), which is not included in the assessment or map. A record from Maharashtra (Yazdani and Mahabal 1976) requires confirmation, but has been confirmed as not belonging to this species (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. October 2020). There are no similar morphological species in Maharashtra (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. October 2020). Manamendra-Arachchi and Pethiyagoda (1998) clarified that it does not occur in Sri Lanka. It has been reported from Karnataka, it is known in Rajiv Gandhi National Park, Nagarahole (Krishna and Sreeada 2012), and Chowdikattae, Halagekerae, Kadubailu, Saave, and Sukhalhatti Wildlife Sanctuaries in Chikkamagaluru District (Dinesh et al. 2013)- however these are thought to be misidentifications and are not included in the assessment or map (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 2020). Ponmudi in Thiruvananthapuram District, Kuttanad in Alappuzha District, Idukki District, Pooyamkutty and Edamalayar in Emakulam District, Palakkad District (Andrews 2004), Thattekkad in Thattekkad Bird Sanctuary (Andrews 2005), and Malayattu Biodiversity Area (Renuka et al. 2010), in Tamil Nadu, Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (Cherian et al. 2000, Kumar et al. 2002) - also misidentifications and need to reallocated to other species (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 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 | For example Eravikulam National Park, Periyar Tiger Reserve in Kerala. |
| 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 is present in several protected areas. |
| 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 | Further habitat protection is required. |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Further research is required on its distribution, natural history, and the effects of climate change and Bd. Population monitoring is also recommended (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 2020). Taxonomic research is also required for the subpopulations in Kerala where the taxonomic identity is uncertain (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). |
| 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 to this species is habitat loss due to the conversion of forested areas for road construction and urbanization. The development of small check dams may be a problem for this species, and this is considered to be a minor threat (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Road mortalities are also an issue and considered to be a minor threat (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Within Eravikulam National Park there is controlled burning of the grasslands which is detrimental to this species and occurs throughout the whole park (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Climate change is a potential future threat which may result in the shifting of habitat, and subpopulations that already exist in higher elevations may be lost as they have no habitat to migrate to (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 2020). Bd has been confirmed in Ponmudi, but no records have been found in the genus and further research is required (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 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 | It is a common species, and hundreds of them can be seen during the breeding season (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 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 | One population has a small tympanum and one with no tympanum at all. |
| 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 | There is no ecologically similar species (India RLA/CNA workshop, October 2020). |
| 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? | 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? | 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 | Several specimens bearing this name, and which are deposited in different museums in India, do not belong to this species (Biju 2001). |
Citation:
Sandeep Das, Nikhil Modak and S.R. Ganesh 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Duttaphrynus microtympanum, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5417
Accessed 30 Jan 2025
