Assessment Results
Nyctibatrachus kempholeyensis
Kempholey Wrinkled Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Nyctibatrachidae
Synonym(s):
Nannobatrachus kempholeyensis
Assessed for:
India
on:
21 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
N.A. Aravind, Nikhil Danddekar, Sandeep Das, Akshay Gawade, Priti Hebbar, Dr. Trupti Jadhav, Gururaja K.V., Nikhil Modak, Seshadri K.S., Vishnupriya Sankararaman and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Data Deficient (DD)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
India
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
19.45870369
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 | |
| 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 was previously only known from its type locality of the "Hills of Kempholey Ghats, Hassan, Mysore, S. India" (Rao 1937) in the southern Western Ghats of Karnataka State in India, at around 400 m asl. It is now widely distributed from the Western Ghats states of Karnataka and Kerala in India. In Karnataka, it occurs in Jog falls, Someshwar, Kempholay, Muthodi and Kemmanagundi (Biju et al. 2011), and the districts of Uttar Kannada, Shimoga, Chikmagalur, Kodagu and Hassan (Krutha et al. 2017). In Kerala, it is present in Banasura, and Suganthagiri (Biju et al. 2011), and the districts of Kannur and Kozhikode (Krutha et al. 2017). Its extent of occurrence (EOO) is 18,157 km2. It is present in the protected areas of Kudremukh National Park, Bhadra Tiger Reserve, Pushpagiri Wildlife Sanctuary, Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary, and Western Ghats World Heritage Site (IUCN and UNEP-WCMC 2020). It also occurs in Malabar Wildlife Sanctuary, Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary, Thamarassery Ghats, Aralam Wildlife Sanctuary (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). It has also been found in Sangameshwar in Ratnagiri district; and Kudal and Dodamarg in Sindhudurg district (Akshay Gawade, pers. comm. October 2020). The species has also been recorded within traditionally-protected areas (Akshay Gawade, pers. comm. October 2020). It ranges between 100-1,560 m asl (Biju et al. 2011). |
| 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 | This species is protected by national legislation. It is present in a number of the 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 | Improved habitat protection is required for this species. |
| 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 its distribution, natural history and ecology, and the effects of Bd. |
| 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 species is known from arecanut plantations and forest edge habitats associated with streams. It can tolerate a degree of habitat disturbance. The habitat used by this species is generally threatened by the conversion of native forest to cultivated areas and the subsistence harvesting of wood and timber. The Yettinahole Project is a series of dams and pipelines to supply water to Bangalore, and is along the Yettinahole stream And Kempholey streams and this will disturb the species habitat (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. September 2020). The use of pesticides and herbicides in arecanut fields, and conversion of forests into paddy fields can be detrimental (N.A. Aravind and Priti Hebbar, pers. comm. September 2020). The Hubli Ankola Railway line is proposed in the Uttara Kannada district, which is also a likely threat (Seshadri K.S., Priti Hebbar and Gururaja K.V., pers. comm. 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). Bd has been confirmed in the genus, but further studies required to investigate the 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? | Yes / probably | This species is very common where it is found (N.A. Aravind, Vishnupriya Sankararaman and Gururaja K.V., pers. comm. September 2020). It is not common in Sangameshwar in Ratnagiri district; and Kudal and Dodamarg in Sindhudurg district, with 2-3 individuals recorded (Akshay Gawade, 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 | This species is named after Kempholey stream (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 would make a good husbandry analog for more threatened species (Gururaja K.V., pers. comm. August 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 | Its breeding behavior is interesting so show people (Gururaja K.V., pers. comm. August 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 | The holotype of this species is lost, but it was re-collected at the type locality and a new neotype was designated. This is a valid species. |
Citation:
N.A. Aravind, Nikhil Danddekar, Sandeep Das, Akshay Gawade, Priti Hebbar, Dr. Trupti Jadhav, Gururaja K.V., Nikhil Modak, Seshadri K.S., Vishnupriya Sankararaman and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Nyctibatrachus kempholeyensis, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5608
Accessed 08 Feb 2025
