Assessment Results
Raorchestes manohari
Order:
Anura
Family:
Rhacophoridae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
12 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Seshadri K.S., Robin Suyesh, Rajkumar K.P. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan
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.] | Endangered (EN) | |
| 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 | This reed bush frog occurs at Bonacaud Estate, Thiruvananthapuram District, and Pandimotta region of Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuary, Kollam District, in the southern Western Ghats state of Kerala in India (Zachariah et al. 2011). It is also known from the Its found in Kakachi, Nalmukku, and Upper Kodayar areas of the Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October, 2020). Probably found more widely across the Agastyamalai Biosphere Reserve (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 2020). It ranges between 900 and 1,300 m asl (Robin Suyesh, 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 | |
| 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 occurs in the Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuary. It is also known from the Its found in Kakachi, Nalmukku, and Upper Kodayar areas of the Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (Seshadri KS, pers. comm. October, 2020). Probably found more widely across the Agastyamalai Biosphere Reserve (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 2020). There is a need for ongoing habitat protection. |
| 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.)? | Unknown | There are no known species-specific conservation actions planned. |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Potential impacts of Bd and climate change as well as gneric research on natural history and reproductive biology (Robin Suyesh and Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 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 | Associated with streams and high elevation bamboo habitat (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 2020). It is unlikely to to tolerate habitat disturbance due to dependence on specific microhabitat (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 2020). Could be some disturbance from tourism. It could be threatened by harvesting of reeds for bamboo pulp outside prtected areas (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 2020). Climate change could be a potential threat to this species (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 2020). Bd has been confirmed in the genus but it is not known if it is a threat (Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 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 | At least three specimens of this taxon are known at present, found during a survey carried out in June 2009 (Zachariah et al. 2011). It is uncertain how many individuals were sighted in the Pandimotta area. Considered moderately common (Seshadri K.S., 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 | |
| 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 | Raorchestes beddomii or R. ponmudi could be potential husbandry analogs for this species, if needed (Karthikeyan Vasudevan, pers. comm. December 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? | Yes | Potential flagship ranking: 3 (tourist), (Kanagavel et al. 2017). Beautiful and brightly coloured bushfrog (Robin Suyesh and Seshadri K.S., pers. comm. October 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 | Difficult to find females. |
| 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:
Seshadri K.S., Robin Suyesh, Rajkumar K.P. and Karthikeyan Vasudevan 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Raorchestes manohari, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5685
Accessed 03 Feb 2025
