Assessment Results
Breviceps gibbosus
Giant Rain Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Brevicipitidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
South Africa
on:
20 Dec 2024
by:
AArk/ASG Southern Africa Workshop
Authors:
Andrew Turner, John Measey, Josh Weeber, Krystal Tolley
IUCN Global Red List:
Near Threatened (NT)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
South Africa
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
25.06280041
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? | No / unlikely | It is unlikely that any of the subpopulations represent 50% of all individuals of the taxon--most occur in heavily fragmented areas. |
| 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 | Occurs in Cape Peninsula National Park, Helderberg Nature Reserve, and Paarl Mountain Nature Reserve. |
| 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.). | No / unlikely | No conservation actions are currently?prioritized?for this species. There is no area-based plan specific to this species, but populations in protected areas benefit from the protected area management plans. |
| 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.)? | No / unlikely | |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | Quantify density of natural populations using acoustic arrays. Quantify if there’s trade and if so, figure out how much of a threat trade poses to the species. |
| 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 | Although it occurs in some urban gardens and tolerates limited modification of habitat, its overall range was severely reduced and fragmented by?agricultural expansion and urban development. It is possibly impacted by the use of pesticides, and herbicides, and it does not occur in agricultural land that is plowed. This might account for the apparent absence of the species from most fragments in the Swartland, north of Cape Town. Hadeda Ibis numbers are expanding into and increasing in numbers in this species' range, which may become more of a significant threat (predation pressure). |
| 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? | Unknown | This species is likely illegally traded, given its accessibility (occurs in urban environments). Members of this genus (Breviceps) are traded illegally and legally--sold based on size (people pay per inch), and this is the largest Breviceps species. |
| 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 | |
| 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? | Yes | People love members of this genus, and this is the largest Breviceps species. It is also the oldest described frog species in all of Africa. Large, passionate volunteer groups try to help this species. |
| 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? | No | |
| 21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Maintained but no successful breeding | The Two Oceans Aquarium likely had this species at one point, but it was probably not bred. |
| 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 | This is the largest Breviceps species. Very charismatic. |
| 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 | This species, originally named Rana gibbosa, was the first African frog species to be entered into the Linnean system of nomenclature in 1758. |
Citation:
Andrew Turner, John Measey, Josh Weeber, Krystal Tolley 2024. Conservation Needs Assessment for Breviceps gibbosus, South Africa
(AArk/ASG Southern Africa Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/7150
Accessed 26 Jan 2025
