Assessment Results
Ghatophryne rubigina
Red Stream Toad, Kerala Stream Toad
Order:
Anura
Family:
Bufonidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
06 Nov 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Nikhil Modak, Sandeep Das, Vishnupriya Sankararaman, Madhushri Mudke, Gururaja K.V. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Vulnerable (VU)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
24.73251466
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.] | Vulnerable (VU) | |
| 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 | This species is present only in the Silent Valley of Kerala State in the southern Western Ghats of India (Biju 2001). It is also known from Mukurthi National Park Tamil Nadu, Mannarkad Forest Division (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). There are records reported from Wayanad areas including Banasuramala in Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, Wayanad District (Easa 1998) and Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary, however further research is required to confirm whether they belong to this species or G. ornata (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). It is likely to be restricted to Nilgiris Mountain Range (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). The species occurs in the well-protected Silent Valley National Park (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). It ranges between 700 and 1,500 m asl (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 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 | Species occurs in the well-protected Silent Valley National Park (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 occurs within the Silent Valley National Park. It is also present in the protected areas of Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve (Easa 1998) and Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary (Abraham et al. 2001). |
| 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 | It is currently considered to be adequately protected within the Silent Valley National Park (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Research is required on the effects of the threats including Bd, distribution, and its population trends (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). The population status of this species requires careful monitoring, given that it is known only from two locations. |
| 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 unlikely to be reversed in time to prevent further decline / extinction | This species is currently only known from well-managed protected areas. However, if this species is confirmed to occur outside protected areas, then the main threat to this species is continuing deforestation (mainly for the cultivation of coffee) in the Coorg area and surroundings. Water abstraction and diversion that is occurring for the irrigation systems for these plantations would also be a threat (Vishnupriya Sankararaman and Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020)). It is unlikely to tolerate habitat disturbance. Climate change is also a potential future threat, with habitat shifting likely to be an issue with the lack of higher elevation habitat for this species to move into (Vishnupriya Sankararaman and Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. September 2020). Bd is present with this species' range, and may be a threat but further studies are required (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 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 rare species (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020), though populations are generally believed to be stable within the Silent Valley National Park. It is not abundant at Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary, where only a few specimens are known, and these were very rarely observed (Abraham et al. 2001). |
| 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 | No aspect of its biology is distinct within the Order Anura, although this is a strikingly-coloured frog (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 | No suitable analog (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 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? | Yes | This is a colorful species that people like to see (Nikhil Modak and Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 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 | Sufficient founders could probably be found, but with some difficulty (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 might be a synonym of Ansonia ornata (S.D. Biju pers. comm.). Priority for future taxonomic research (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. September 2020). |
Citation:
Nikhil Modak, Sandeep Das, Vishnupriya Sankararaman, Madhushri Mudke, Gururaja K.V. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Ghatophryne rubigina, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5442
Accessed 30 Jan 2025
