Assessment Results
Pterorana khare
Indian Flying Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Ranidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
15 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, Mohini Mohan Borah, Dr. Tutul Bortamuli, Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, Kaushik Deuti, H.T. Lalremsanga, Nikhil Modak, Jayanta Roy, Saibal Sengupta, Benjamin Tapley, Dr. Chatoan Tesia and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
IUCN Global Red List:
Vulnerable (VU)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
Bangladesh, India, Myanmar
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
15.98238431
Recommended Conservation Actions:
Additional Comments:
The Central Zoo Authority of the Ministry of Environmental, Forest and Climate Change of India identifies this taxon as a target amphibian species in 2013 (Gupta 2017), however this species has been re-assessed as Least Concern (India RLA/CNA workshop, November 2020).
| Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
| 1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Least Concern (LC) | |
| 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? | No / unlikely | This species was previously only recorded from disjunct areas in north-east India, with the main part of the distribution within central and western Nagaland. A second subpopulation was reported from the Pakhui Wildlife Sanctuary and nearby Nameri National Park in Assam (Saibal Sengupta, pers. comm. November 2020). It is now known to occur in Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, the bank of river Tlawng in Sairang, 21 km from Aizawl in Mizoram State; and Dhaleswari river, Bairabi, Mizoram (Ao et al. 2006), Manipur and Meghalaya. Additional specmenis were collected from Bumdaling WIldlife Sanctauray in Manipur (Kaushik Deuti, pers. comm, September 2020). It has been documented from Khonsa, Tirap, Arachunal Pradesh (Tesia & Bordoloi, 2013). Specimens were collected from Tuivawl river, Teirei river (Dampa Tiger Reserve), Tuipawl river and Tuithum stream (near Mizoram University campus) in the outskirt of Aizawl city during October to November (H.T. Lalremsanga, pers. comm. September 2020). It has been described from Jokhoma River, Rokhroma stream, Tsureng stream and Japu stream in Nagaland, with tadpole development observed in Japu and Tsureng streams (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. September 2020). It is likely to occur somewhat more widely. It is present at elevations of 200-2,500 m asl. |
| 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? | Unknown | |
| 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 has been reported from a number of protected areas, including Nameri National Park and Pakhui Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam, and (Teirei River) Dampa Tiger Reserve. It is protected by national legislation. |
| 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 | Additional habitat protection is required. |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Unknown | |
| 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 has been found in secondary forest (H.T. Lalremsanga, pers. comm. September 2020). The major threat to this species is the pollution of streams by poisons used to capture fish, and the poisons will also kill tadpoles during the breeding season (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. September 2020). It is collected for local subsistence and/or medicinal purposes in Nagaland and Mizoram, which may be a localised threat to the subpopulations there, and the population is declining in areas where it is collected. Loss of its unique microhabitat requirements will cause a decline to this species (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. September 2020). Pollution from human habitation is also a threat to this species (Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, pers. comm. September 2020). Habitat fragmentation and loss, since the construction of National Highway (NH 215) came up in 2015 and functional now, there have been obvious decrease in sighting of this species (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 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? | Yes / probably | The population is decreasing due to being caught for local consumption (H.T. Lalremsanga, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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 to be a rare species, probably because of its unique microhabitat requirements, and loss of these habitats will cause a decline to this species (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, 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 identified that is unique to species | In males the skin is permanently extended (in other species this occurs only during the breeding season). The female leaves the breeding location, and the males remain with the eggs (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi and Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, 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 | It is collected for local subsistence and/or medicinal purposes in Nagaland and Mizoram, and in Arunachal (Dr. Chatoan Tesia, 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 | Only found in swift flowing streams, and they require higher levels of oxygenation (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. September 2020). Will likely be a difficult species to maintain in captivity because of its specific requirements (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 2020). It is the only species in a monotypic genus and other frogs occur in similar habitats e.g. Amolops (Benjamin Tapley, pers. comm. December 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 | In males the skin is permanently extended (in other species this occurs only during the breeding season). The female leaves the breeding location, and the males remain with the eggs (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi and Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 23 | Mandate | Is there an existing conservation mandate recommending the ex situ conservation of this taxon? | Yes | The Central Zoo Authority of the Ministry of Environmental, Forest and Climate Change of India identifies this taxon as a target amphibian species in 2013 (Gupta 2017). |
| 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 | It would be easy to collect males, but it might be difficult to locate females, unless they are captured during the period they are breeding (Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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:
Mohammad Firoz Ahmed, Mohini Mohan Borah, Dr. Tutul Bortamuli, Prof. Sabitry Choudhury Bordoloi, Kaushik Deuti, H.T. Lalremsanga, Nikhil Modak, Jayanta Roy, Saibal Sengupta, Benjamin Tapley, Dr. Chatoan Tesia and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Pterorana khare, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5651
Accessed 30 Jan 2025
