Assessment Results
Nyctibatrachus vrijeuni
VUB Night Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Nyctibatrachidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
13 Nov 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Sandeep Das, S.R. Ganesh and S.R. Chandramouli
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.] | 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? | Yes / probably | This night frog occurs in the states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu in India (Biju et al. 2011, Princy et al. 2017). In Kerala State, it is present in Suganthagiri and Mananthavady in Wayanad District (Biju et al. 2011). In Tamil Nadu State, in Mettupalayam in Coimbatore District (Biju et al. 2011), and Kotagiri and Coonoor in Nilgiri District (Princy et al. 2017). It is also known from Malabar Wildlife Sanctuary, Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary, Thamarassery Ghats and Aralam Wildlife Sanctuary in Kerala, and Silent Valley National Park and Mukurthi National Park in Tamil Nadu (Sandeep Das and S.R. Ganesh, pers. comm. 2020). It ranges between 8,00 and 2,000 m asl (Biju et al. 2011, 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 | Malabar Wildlife Sanctuary, Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary and Aralam Wildlife Sanctuary, Silent Valley National Park and Mukurthi National Park |
| 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 known from 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 | Habitat protection is a key conservation measure recommended for this taxon (Biju et al. 2011). |
| 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 its distribution, and the effects of Bd and climate change are required. Population monitoring is also recommended (India RL/CNA Assessment Workshop 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 unlikely to be reversed in time to prevent further decline / extinction | This species is unlikely to tolerate habitat disturbance and loss, as it requires canopy cover (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Within cardamom plantations the use of pesticides poses a minor threat to this species. Outside of protected areas, habitat conversion for human settlements and road construction pose major threats to this species, as does the possibility of road mortalities (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020, S.R. Ganesh and S.R. Chandramouli, pers. comm. 2020). Climate change poses a potential future threat which may result in the shifting and drying of habitat. This shift could cause a loss of subpopulations at higher elevations as they will have no habitat to migrate to (India RL/CNA Assessment Workshop 2020). Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) has been confirmed in the genus, with morbidity observed but no mortalities to date, but further studies required to investigate full effects on this species (India RL/CNA Assessment Workshop 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 | This is a common species (Sandeep Das and S.R. Ganesh, pers. comm. 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 | Nyctibatrachus indraneili and Nyctibatrachus sanctipalustris would be good husbandry analogs for this species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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? | No | |
| 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 and S.R. Chandramouli 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Nyctibatrachus vrijeuni, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5626
Accessed 28 Apr 2025
