Assessment Results
Raorchestes ghatei
Ghate's Shrub Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Rhacophoridae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
16 Sep 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Nikhil Danddekar, Priti Hebbar, Amit Hegde, Girish K.G., Krishna Komanduri, Seshadri K.S., 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:
18.03724571
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? | Yes / probably | It is thought that approximately 50% of the population is likely to be found in protected areas (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 2020). This bush frog is widely distributed in the Western Ghats state of Maharashtra in India. It has been recorded from the Satara District at Chalkewadi, Kaas, and Thoseghar, the Patan District at Jaichiwadi, the Junnar District at Taleghar near Bhimashankar (Padhye et al. 2013), and the Pune District at Mulshi (Padhye et al. 2013, Dahanukar et al. 2013, Molur et al. 2015). It is present in the protected area Western Ghats World Heritage Site (IUCN and UNEP-WCMC 2020) , and it may occur in the the Sanjay Gandhi National Park (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020) although this requires confirmation. It also occurs in the Nasik District (Nikhil Danddekar, pers. comm. September 2020), and has been found in Bhimashankar Wildlife Sanctuary, Sahyadri Tiger Reserve, Harishchandrgad-Kalsubai Wildlife Sanctuary (BD record) (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). It is likely to be restricted to its known range, as surveys outside of this have not produced any further records (Dr. Anand Padhye and Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). It ranges between 30 and 1,200 m asl (Padhye et al. 2013, Dr. Anand Padhye, pers. comm. September 2020). It is also found in lower elevations but this needs genetic confirmation (Nikhil Modak and Dr. Anand Padhye, 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 has been confirmed in a number of protected areas, and it may occur in the Sanjay Gandhi National Park, however these records require genetic confirmation (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. September 2020). |
| 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, along with the education of tourists to reduce their environmental impact (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 | Further studies on distribution, population status, and threats are needed, particularly on the impact of the chytrid fungal infection on this taxon (Padhye et al. 2013). |
| 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 is likely to tolerate a degree of habitat disturbance such as the conversion of primary forest to secondary forest (Nikhil Modak, pers. comm. 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, and the development of railways in Castle Rock (K.V. Gururaja and Seshadri KS, pers. comm. August 2020), small-scale plantations, illegal encroachment and unsustainable harvesting of tree species (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 2020). Tourism and recreational activities (effects including plastic pollution and species disturbance), wind farm development is occurring in Satara District (Padhye et al. 2013), and the chytrid Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis fungal infection (Padhye et al. 2013, Molur et al. 2015, Thorpe et al. 2018). Bd has been confirmed within Bhimashankar Wildlife Sanctuary, Sahyadri Tiger Reserve, Harishchandrgad-Kalsubai Wildlife Sanctuary, where this species has been found. Road mortalities are also a problem, particularly for the females of the 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? | 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 taxon is considered common (Padhye et al. 2013), and it is regularly found in surveys (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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.)? | 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? | 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 could be used as an analog for more threatened species in the same genus (India RLA/CNA workshop, September 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 | It has interesting color morphs, and because of this, has been used on a postage stamp (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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)? | No | Research into species validity needs to be prioritised. This is a split from the broader concept of Raorchestes bombayensis. We need to look for cryptic species within this concept in northern Maharashtra (Dr. Anand Padhye, pers. comm. September 2020). |
Citation:
Nikhil Danddekar, Priti Hebbar, Amit Hegde, Girish K.G., Krishna Komanduri, Seshadri K.S., Nikhil Modak, Dr. Anand Padhye, Harshil Patel and Gayathri Sreedharan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Raorchestes ghatei, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5669
Accessed 23 Jan 2025
