Assessment Results
Raorchestes resplendens
Resplendent Shrubfrog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Rhacophoridae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
India
on:
28 Oct 2020
by:
AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop
Authors:
Sandeep Das
IUCN Global Red List:
Critically Endangered (CR)
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) | Listed as Endangered because its extent of occurrence (EOO) is 507 km2, it occurs in five or fewer threat-defined locations, and there is continuing decline in the extent and quality of its habitat. |
| 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 species was previously only known from Anamudi summit (2,695 m asl), Idukki District, Eravikulam National Park, Kerala, India (Biju et al. 2010). It has also been found in the Poovar region of Eravikulam National Park in Kerala (Joseph et al. 2012), and Chinnar Wildlife Sanctuary, Indira Gandhi Tiger Reserve and Munnar Forest Division (Das, S., Rajkumar K.P., Sreejith, K.A., Royaltata, M. and Easa, P.S., 2020). It is likely for this taxon to be more widespread in the high altitude primary grasslands of Eravikulam National Park and surrounding areas of the Western Ghats than earlier believed (Joseph et al. 2012). Intensive surveys in suitable habitat in the near vicinity of the type locality did not render any additional records of this species (Biju et al. 2010, SD Biju, pers. comm. December 2010). It is likely restricted to the Anamalai Hill Range (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. 2020). It ranges between 1,896-2,685 m asl (Joseph et al. 2012, Sandeep Das, pers. comm. 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 occurs in the highly protected Eravikulam National Park (S.D. Biju, pers. comm. December 2010). |
| 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 site management of the existing parks is required for this species. |
| 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 are required. Population monitoring is also recommended. |
| 10 | Threat mitigation | Are the threats facing the taxon, including any new and emerging threats not considered in the IUCN Red List, potentially reversible? | Species is effectively protected | This species is unlikely to tolerate habitat loss and disturbance (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). It occurs in a highly protected national park, where there are no observable threats to this species (SD Biju, pers. comm. December 2010). Within Eravikulam National Park there is controlled burning of the grasslands which is detrimental to this species and occurs throughout the whole park (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Climate change is a potential future threat as it could cause habitat shifting (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Screening for chytrid fungus has so far turned up negative (S.D. Biju, pers. comm. January 2011), and the cause for observed declines remains unknown. |
| 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? | Unknown | It is considered to be a common species, and is considered to be the second most common species in grassland ecosystem after Raorchestes dubois (Sandeep Das, pers. comm. October 2020). Previously, this species was considered to be extremely rare, as it was known only from the type locality. |
| 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 | It is a bright colored species (India RLA/CNA workshop, 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 | |
| 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 2020. Conservation Needs Assessment for Raorchestes resplendens, India
(AArk/ASG India Assessment Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/5693
Accessed 31 Mar 2025
