Assessment Results
Micrixalus thampii
Silent Valley Dancing Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Micrixalidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
06 Nov 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Sandeep Das, S.R. Ganesh, S.R. Chandramouli and Madhushri Mudke
IUCN Global Red List:
Data Deficient (DD)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
23.8216461
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 - 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? | Yes / probably | This species was previously only known from its type locality in the Silent Valley National Park, in the Western Ghats in India at approximately 900 m asl. It now also occurs in Sairandhri, Silent Valley, Kuddam and Singappara in Siruvani, in Palakkad District, Kerala State (Biju et al. 2014), Attappady Reserve Forest and Sholayur in Kerala (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. November 2020). It possibly occurs a little more widely, north of Palghet Gap (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). It ranges between 758 and 1,200 m asl (Biju et al. 2014, Sandeep Das, pers. comm. 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 | |
| 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 only known from the well-protected Silent Valley National Park in Kerala, and it is also protected by national legislation. This species is subject to ongoing studies by Biju (pers. comm.). |
| 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 | Improved habitat management and regulation of tourism activities in protected areas is needed. |
| 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 on distribution, and the effects of Bd and climate change. Population monitoring is also recommended (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 | This species is unlikely to tolerate habitat loss or disturbance (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Outside of protected areas, intensively managed agricultural practices and cardamom and cocoa plantations present a threat to the species, along with stream diversion for water irrigation systems and the development of small check dams (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. November 2020). They degrade and convert the aquatic and terrestrial habitats of this species. In particular, vegetation is cleared and synthetic fertilizers and pesticides degrade the water quality it relies on. In addition, unchecked tourism activities are also degrading water sources through dumping of trash and sewage is considered to be a minor threat (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. November 2020). Climate change is likely to be a potential future threat as increased rains and monsoons will increase the risk of flooding (Madhushri Mudke and Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020) and habitat shifting might be an issue for the higher areas of Silent Valley National Park (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. November 2020). Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) has been found in other species of the genus, so chytridiomycosis may be a potential threat for this species but further research is required (Madhushri Mudke and Sandeep Das, pers. comm. 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 | The species is infrequently encountered during surveys suggesting that it is relatively uncommon across its range (S.R. Ganesh and S.R. Chandramouli, 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 | |
| 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? | Yes / probably | Micrixalus gadgili would be a good husbandry analog for all smaller Micrixalus (M. sali, M. thampii and M. nudis) (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. November 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 | Potential flagship ranking: 4 (tourist), (Kanagavel et al. 2017). This is one of the dancing frog species, which have a unique habit of waving their feet to attract females during the breeding season, or for defense (Madhushri Mudke, pers. comm. October 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)? | Yes |
Citation:
Sandeep Das, S.R. Ganesh, S.R. Chandramouli and Madhushri Mudke 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Micrixalus thampii, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5544
Accessed 04 Feb 2025
