Assessment Results
Nyctibatrachus kumbara
Kumbara 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, Girish K.G., 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.] | Not Evaluated (NE) | |
| 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? | No / unlikely | This mud packing frog occurs in the rivers Tunga, Sharavathi, Aghanashini and Bedthi, in the Shimoga and Uttara Kannada districts of the Karnataka State in South India (Gururaja et al. 2014). It is also present in Kali (Priti Hebbar, pers. comm. September 2020). The species is found in the Kali Tiger Reserve, and Sharavathi Wildlife Sanctuary and Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). It might occur more widely than is currently known (Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, pers. comm. September 2020). It ranges between 583 and 900 m asl (Gururaja et al. 2014, Girish KG, 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 | The species is found in a number of 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 | Educating the farmers about sustainable use of leaf litter and pruning of green leaves has to be promote to conserve the habitat (Girish KG, pers. comm. September 2020). Improved habitat protection is required, as well as education of tourists on their littering behaviours would also be beneficial for this species. educating the farmers about sustainable use of leaf litter and pruning of green leaves has to be promote to conserve the habitat of N. kumbara (Girish KG, 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 | The recommended conservation measures for this taxon are taxonomy, distribution and natural history research, particularly on breeding behavior, ecology, and parental care (Gururaja et al. 2014). There is some confusion between the field identification of this species and N. karnatakaensis, and N. grandis and further genetics and acoustic research would be useful to determine each of their true distributions. 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 | The Kudremukh National Park is threatened by mining activities, and the harvesting of wood and timber by the local people. The development of recreation activities in the area is also considered a threat (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 2020). There is an ongoing loss of natural habitats due to anthropogenic disturbance over much of the Western Ghats. This is caused by the development of roads and road widening (K.V. Gururaja pers. comm. August 2020), small-scale plantations, illegal encroachment and unsustainable harvesting of tree species (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 2020). The conversion of land to any plantation results in the removal of the understorey vegetation, and traditional farming practices (Soppinabetta) in the area causes the removal of leaf litter which results in the loss of breeding sites and causes disturbance to breeding activity (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 2020). Stream water diversion for drinking and agriculture purposes is reducing water flow in upstreams throughout its range (Girish KG, pers. comm. September 2020). Tourism is also causing disturbance to the species and is likely to interfere with its breeding activity, and plastic pollution. Bd has been found in other species of the genus, so it may be a potential threat for this species but requires further study. |
| 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 considered locally abundant in the surroundings of the type locality (Gururaja et al. 2014). Population studies were undertaken between 2006-2010 and the population was considered to be locally abundant (Girish KG, 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 | Parental care by males consists of packing the eggs with mud, and it is thought that only one or two more species might exhibit this behavior (Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, pers. comm. September 2020). Some tadpoles of this species have been observed to hibernate over the non-breeding season, and then develop during the following breeding season (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? | Yes | The name Kumbara means potter in the local Kannada language (Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, 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? | 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 | Parental care by males consists of packing the eggs with mud (Kotambylu Vasudeva Gururaja, pers. comm. September 2020). Some tadpoles of this species have been observed to hibernate over the non-breeding season, and then develop during the following breeding season (Nikhil Modak, 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 | |
| 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, Girish K.G., Krishna Komanduri, Nikhil Modak, Dr. Anand Padhye, Harshil Patel and Gayathri Sreedharan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Nyctibatrachus kumbara, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5609
Accessed 21 Apr 2025
