Assessment Results
Nyctibatrachus jog
Jog's Night Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Nyctibatrachidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
16 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Nikhil Danddekar, Gururaja K.V., Priti Hebbar, Amit Hegde, Krishna Komanduri, Nikhil Modak, Dr. Anand Padhye, Harshil Patel and Gayathri Sreedharan
IUCN Global Red List:
Not Evaluated (NE)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
21.53045368
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.] | 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 - 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 night frog occurs in the in Jog Falls, Mavingundi, in the Shimoga District (Biju et al. 2011, Zsemberovszky et al. 2018), Mavingundi in Uttar Kannada District (Zsemberovszky et al. 2018), Kathalekan in Uttara Kannada District (Gururaja et al. 2014, Shamanna et al. 2016), and Kathalekan, Baregudda, and Hejanifalls in Aghanashini Lion Tailed Macaque Conservation Reserve (Priti et al. 2015), Karnataka State, India. It is also known from Tillari Conservation Reserve (Krishna Komanduri, pers. comm. September 2020) and Kodachadri, Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary (Girish KG, pers. comm. September 2020). It may occur more widely than is currently known (Priti Hebbar, pers. comm. September 2020). It ranges between 300 and 800 m asl (Biju et al. 2011, Gururaj et al. 2014, Amit Hegde and Priti Hebbar, 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 | |
| 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 found in one or two protected areas and it is found in a number of reserve forests. |
| 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 | Habitat protection is a key conservation measure recommended for this taxon (Biju et al. 2011). Education of tourists about reducing their impact would be beneficial for this species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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 on the ecology of this taxon is recommended (Shamanna et al. 2016). Population monitoring is also recommended. Further studies are required to investigate the full effects of Bd on this species (India RLA/CNA workshop September 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 | It has been found in roadside streams, and it can tolerate a degree of habitat disturbance (Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, pers. comm. September 2020). The construction of roads and the development of tourism in the region, are all considered threats to this species as they destroy the breeding habitats (Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, Dr. Anand Padhye and Priti Hebbar, pers. comm. September 2020). Small-scale plantations, illegal encroachment and unsustainable harvesting of tree species are also current threats (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 2020). Tourism is also causing disturbance to the species and is likely to interfere with its breeding activity (Priti Hebbar, pers. comm. September 2020). Stream water diversion for drinking and agriculture purposes is reducing water flow in upstream (Girish KG, pers. comm. September 2020). Some malformations have been observed in this species, however the cause is currently unknown (Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, pers. comm. September 2020). This species has been swabbed in Tilari, or Bd, however it has not been detected in the species (Gayathri Sreedharan, pers. comm. September 2020) and further studies required to investigate full effects on this species. |
| 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? | Unknown | This species is locally common (Priti Hebbar and Girish K.G., pers. comm. September 2020), and it is more abundant in the breeding season (Priti Hebbar and Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, pers. comm. September 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.)? | Aspect of biology shared with < 6 other species | A new type of amplexus habit (dorsal straddle amplexus) has been observed in this species (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020, Willaer et al. 2020) and the female is known to call (Nikhil Modak, 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 | |
| 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 | Both males and females attend egg clutches laid on leaves, branches, and tree bark by positioning themselves on top of them (Biju et al. 2011, Gururaja et al. 2014). |
| 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:
Nikhil Danddekar, Gururaja K.V., Priti Hebbar, Amit Hegde, Krishna Komanduri, Nikhil Modak, Dr. Anand Padhye, Harshil Patel and Gayathri Sreedharan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Nyctibatrachus jog, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5606
Accessed 08 Feb 2025
