frog leg Newsletter of the Amphibian Network of South Asia and the Amphibian Specialist Group - South Asia ISSN: 2230-7060 No.19 | August 2013 w8 b o 7 d 0 5 n c f z a i j g

v 6 4 9 y s tl www.zoosprint.org/Newsletters/frogleg.htm frog leg is registered under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License, which allows unrestricted use of articles in any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication. OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD frog leg | #19 | August 2013 Contents

Note on the Tadpole of Indian Bullfrog Hoplobatrachus tigerinus Scavenging on Ornate Narrow-mouthed Frog Microhyla ornata 3-4pp -- Raju Vyas

Occurrence of Kaloula taprobanica in Daryapur, Maharashtra 5-6pp -- Abhishek R. Dhande & Aarti G. Khandare

Checklist of Amphibians of Goa 7-12pp -- Nirmal Kulkarni, K.P. Dinesh, P. Prashanth, G. Bhatta & C. Radhakrishnan

A Preliminary Study on the Anurans in Three Different Habitats of Karnataka 13- 19pp -- S. Ramakrishna, P. Deepak, M. Shekar, K.V. Shashikala, S. Poornima & M. Jayashankar

Diversity of Anuran Fauna in Mangalore Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District, Karnataka, India 20-28pp -- Vijay Mala Nair & K. Santhosh Kumar

2 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Note on the tadpole of Indian Bullfrog Hoplobatrachus Sazima 1977). tigerinus scavenging on Ornate Narrow-mouthed Frog Microhyla ornata During the exploration of amphibian fauna at Shoolpaneshwar Raju Vyas Wildlife Sanctuary (SWS), Gujarat, I came across an unusual observation 505, Krishnadeep Tower, Mission Road, Fatehgunj, Vadodara-Gujarat, India of the feeding habits of anuran [email protected] tadpoles on 3 August 2005, in the evening, at Samot forest area of SWS. It was a rainy day and Anuran tadpoles are known to Cannibalism is also widespread seven species of frogs belonging be filter feeders in general (Altig among anurans, and appears to to four different families namely, & McDearman 1975). Some play an important role in the biology Duttaphrynus melanostictus, are herbivorous and consume of many species (Alford 1999). In Microhyla ornata, Hoplobatrachus different kinds of algae, including their early life stages (tadpoles tigerinus, Fejervarya limnocharis, filamentous green algae, epiphytic and juveniles) they are frequently Euphlyctis cynophlyctis, and epibenthic algae, planktonic cannibalistic (Polis & Myers 1985). Sphaerotheca breviceps and diatoms, unicellular chlorophytes The tadpoles of some species feed Polypedates maculatus were and cyanobacteria (Kupferberg on conspecific eggs or tadpoles active and loudly signaling mating et al. 1994). Some others are (Muedeking & Heyer 1976; Hero calls. Eleven amphibian species carnivorous (Caldwell & Araújo & Galatti 1990; Silva et al. 2005; belonging to four families from 10 1998; Grosjean et al. 2004) and Pirani et al. 2010) while others genera have been recorded at SWS consume plankton, eggs, larvae prey upon hetero-specific tadpoles (Vyas 2012). and decaying dead animals. (Heyer et al. 1975; Cardoso & I saw a small group (8-10) of tadpoles in an artificial water body situated on the way to the forest Image 1. Tadpoles of Hoplobatrachus tigerinus feeding off an adult frog Microhyla ornata in a man-made water body at Shoolpaneswar Wildlife Sanctuary, Gujarat guesthouse, actively scraping off an adult frog; the frog was dead and floating on the water surface (Image 1) . At an interval of about Raju Vyas every one or two minutes, a new group of tadpoles (gosner stage, 36 to 40) came to the surface (H. tigerinus are typically bottom dwelling tadpoles) and fed on the frog. A few tadpoles were collected for further identification. On careful examination, tadpoles were identified as H. tigerinus and the dead frog as M. ornata. Tadpoles

3 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

were released back in the same North Gujarat for his help during the (Ranidae). Biological Journal of the water body after identification. study. Also, without the extensive Linnean Society 81: 171–181. Hero, J.M. & U. Galatti (1990). help from Range Forest Officers, Characteristics distinguishing Lep­todactylus The next morning, I again especially Mr. Solanki and Topiya, pentadactylus and Leptodactylus knudseni observed a few tadpoles feeding on I would not have been able to get in the Central Amazon rainforest. Journal another dead M. ornata along with accommodation at the forest of Herpetology 24: 227-228. Heyer, W.R., R.W. McDiarmid & D.L. a 60-70% eaten individual of the guesthouse at Mal-Samot and Weigmann (1975). Tad­poles, predation, same species (probably the remains their help in solving the ground- and pond habitats in the tropics. Biotropica of the individual encountered on the level problems. I am grateful to Mr. 7:100-111. previous day). The observations C.N. Pandey (IFS), Ex. Director Khan, M.S. (1996). Oropharyngeal morphology and feeding habits of Tiger reported here support Khan’s and B.R. Raval, Ex. Dy. Director, frog Rana tigerina Daudin. Russian study (1996), that the H. tigerinus Gujarat Ecological Education Journal of Herpetology 2:163-171. tadpoles are predominantly Research Foundation, Gandhinagar, Kupferberg, S.J., J.C. Marks & W.E. carnivorous and feed primarily on Gujarat State, for providing me with Power (1994). Effects of variation in sympatric tadpoles and bodies of logistical support. natural algal and detrital diets on larval anuran (Hyla regilla) life history traits. drowned animals. Copeia 1994 (2): 446-457. References Muedeking, M.H. & W.R. Heyer (1976). At the time of birth, H. tigerinus Descriptions of eggs and reproductive measure 5mm in size (minimum) Alford, R.A. (1999). Ecology: resource use, patterns of Leptodactylus pentadactylus competition, and predation. In: McDiarmid, (Am­phibia: Leptodactylidae). Herpetologica and after five-six weeks they R.W. and Altig, R. (Eds), Tadpoles: the 32: 137-139. grow up to 63-69 mm (Khan biology of anuran larvae. The University Petranka, J.W., M.E. Hopey, B.T. 1996), which is almost equal to of Chicago Press: 240-278. Chicago, Jennings, S.D. Baird & S.J. Boone the size of an adult female M. USA. (1994). Breeding habitat segregation of Altig, R. & R.W. McDerman (1975). wood frogs and American toads: the role ornata (Image 2). Therefore, there Present assimilation and clearance of five of interspecific tadpole predation and adult is a chance that the tadpoles of H. anuran tadpoles. Herpetologica 31:67- choice. Copeia 1994: 691-697. tigerinus prey upon live, adult frogs 69. Pirani, R.M., E.T. da Silva & R.N. of M. ornata. Here, it is difficult Caldwell, J.P. & M.C. Araújo (1998). Feio (2010). Tadpole cannibalism in to presume whether the tadpoles Cannibalistic interactions re­sulting from Leptodactylus cunicularius Sazima & indiscriminate predatory behaviour Bokermann 1978 (Anura: Leptodactylidae) preyed on a live frog or a dead in tadpoles of poison frogs (Anura: at a temporary stream in South-eastern one and therefore is a question for Dendrobatidae). Biotropica 30: 92-103. Brazil. Herpetology Notes 3:359-360. further investigation. Cardoso, A.J. & I. Sazima (1977). Polis, G.A. & C.A. Myers (1985). A survey Batracofagia na fase adulta e larvária da of intraspecific preda­tion among reptiles rã-pimenta Leptodactylus labyrinthicus - and amphibians. Journal of Herpetology Acknowledgements Anura, Leptodactylidae. Ciência e Cultura 19: 99-107. I am thankful to Mr. S.M. Patel, 29: 1130-1132. Silva, W.R., A.A. Giaretta & K.G. Facure Conservator of Forests, Rajpipla, Champion, H.G. & S.K. Seth (1968). A (2005). On the natu­ral history of the revised survey of the forest types of India, South American pepper frog, Leptodactylus Manager of Publication, Government of labyrinthicus (Spix, 1824) (Anura: Image 2. An adult female Microhyla ornata India, New Delhi. 404 pp. Leptodactylidae). Journal of Nature Grosjean, S., M. Vences & A. Dubois History 39: 555-566. (2004). Evolutionary significance of Vyas, R. (2012). Frogs of Shoolpaneswr oral morphology in the carnivorous tadpoles Wildlife Sanctuary, Gujarat, India. Froglog of tiger frogs, genus Hoplobatrachus 101: 54-56. al p r japati Vi r al

4 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Occurrence of Kaloula taprobanica in Daryapur, Inter-orbital space is larger than Maharashtra the upper eyelid. Fingers are free with truncated discs. Color pattern Abhishek R. Dhande1 & Aarti G. Khandare2 consists of a brown median area flanked by yellow and red dorso- 1 Department of Zoology, BP Arts, SMA Science and KKC Commerce Col- lateral bands; an inter-orbital bar lege, Chalisgaon, District Jalgaon, Maharashtra of the same color. Both the bands 2 Nirmala Vidyalaya, at post- Kapustalni, Taluka- Anjangaon-Surji, District- and markings have a black border Amravati, Maharashtra [email protected] * 1, [email protected] 2, (Sengupta et al. 2009).

In spite of its occurrence in central and southern Indian states, the species has not been reported The occurrence of Kaloula K. pulchra, K. taprobanica, K. from Maharashtra previously taprobanica (Parker, 1934) assamensis and K. baleata (Chanda and this highlights the need to commonly known as Sri Lankan 2002; Das et al. 2004) Of systematically survey the amphibian Bull-Frog or Painted Kaloula, is these K. taprobanica (Parker, fauna of the Vidarbha region. reported for the first time here from 1934) has been reported from the

the state of Maharashtra; from the states of Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Acknowledgements suburban area of Daryapur Town, Assam, Gujarat, Karnataka, 55km from Amaravati City. A Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and The authors are grateful to the single individual was found on 16 Kerala (Abdulalli 1962; Daniel college administration for providing October 2010 at 20:00 hours. & Verma 1963; Inger & Dutta, the facilities. We express our The mean temperature at Daryapur 1986; Daniel 2002; Sengupta et gratitude to Dr. Jayant Wadatkar, ranges from 7–45 0C while the al. 2009; Srinivasulu et al. 2010; Secretary Wildlife and Environment rainfall ranges up to 2000mm. Vyas 2010). Kaloula taprobanica is Conservation Society, Amravati for The nearest major water body is endemic to the Indian subcontinent his help during referencing. We are River Chandrabhaga. The area is (Kirtisinghe 1957; Daniel 2005). thankful to Mr. Mohanish Bokhad dominated by shrubby vegetation for identifying the plant species, like Aerva lanata, Alternanthera Kaloula taprobanica is a semi- Dr. A.B. Sawarkar and Dr. Ramesh sessilis, Carrica papaya, Ziziphus arboreal frog commonly encountered Chondekar for their constant jujuba and Pergularia daemia. in dry deciduous forests inhabiting support and encouragement and tree holes, between 1 and 6 m Mr. Amit Khandare who assisted The genus Kaloula (Anura: above the ground (Sengupta et al. us during the fieldtrip. Microhylidae) is pan Asian in its 2009). This species is a Least distribution whose occurrence Concern species as per the IUCN References ranges from Korea, northern Red List of Threatened Species China to the lesser Sundas, across (IUCN 2011). It is a moderately- Abdulali, H. (1962). An account of a the Philippines and the Indian sized frog (SVL 59.4 mm), having trip to the Barapede Cave, Talewadi, subcontinent (Dutta 1997; Das et a short snout, which is slightly Belgaun District Mysore State, al. 2004). In India four species larger than the eye diameter and with some notes on Reptiles and of Kaloula have been reported, the nostril is closer to the snout tip. Amphibians. Journal of Bombay

5 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Natural History Society 59: 228- Indian Reptiles and Amphibians. Overview of amphibian fauna of India. 237. Bombay Natural History Society, Journal of Bombay Natural History Srinivasulu, C., M. Siliwal, A. Rajesh, Oxford University Press, Mumbai. Society 83 (supplement):135-146. B. Srinivasulu, P. Venkateshwarulu 238. IUCN (2011). www.iucnredlist.org. (Date & V. Nagulu (2010). Diversity Daniels, R.J.R. (2005) Amphibians of access- 10 October 2010) and Distribution of Amphibian fauna of Peninsular India. India - A lifescape. Kirtisinghe, P. (1957). The Amphibia of in Nagarjunsagar-Srisailam Tiger Indian Academy of Sciences/ Ceylon. Privately published,Colombo. Reserve, Andhra Pradesh. Frogleg 13 Universities Press (India) Private 112pp. December 2010: 3-6. Limited, Hyderabad. Xii + 4 plates + Sengupta, S., A. Das, S. Das, B. Chanda, S.K. (2002) Hand book- 268 pp. + 55 plates. Hussain, N.K. Choudhary & S.K. Indian Amphibians. Zoological Survey Das, I., S. Sengupta, Ahmed, M. Firoz Dutta (2009). Taxonomy and of India, Calcutta. i – Viii, 335 pp. & S.K. Dutta (2004) A new Biogeography of Kaloula Species of Daniel, J.C. & K.K. Verma (1963) species of Kaloula (Microhylidae) from Eastern India, the Natural History Occurrence of Ceylon Kaloula pulchra Assam State, north-eastern India. Journal of Chulalongkorn University taprobanica H.W. Parker Family Hamadryad 29: 101-109 9(2): 209-222. Microhylidae at Jagdalpur, Bastar Dutta, S.K. (1997) Amphibians of Vyas, R. (2010). A Field guide to the District MP. Journal of Bombay India and Sri Lanka (Checklist and amphibians of Gujarat, Nature Club Natural History Society 60:744- Bibliography). Odyssey Publishing Surat. (Date of assess- 10 – 10- 745. House, Orrisa, India 342pp. + xxii. 2010), www.natureclubsurat.org/ Daniel, J.C. (2002) The Book of Inger, R.F. & S.K. Dutta (1986) An Products/ambiphianbook.pdf

7 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Checklist of Amphibians of Goa covered under protected areas composing of one national park Nirmal Kulkarni1 1, K.P. Dinesh 2, P. Prashanth 3, G. Bhatta 4 & C. and six wildlife sanctuaries and Radhakrishnan 5 the remaining 38% being reserve forests. Forest types include 1 Mhadei Research Centre, C/o Hiru Naik Bldg, Dhuler Mapusa, Goa estuarine forests, scrub jungles, 403507 India mixed deciduous forests and semi 2 Southern Regional Centre, Zoological Survey of India, Chennai, Tamil Nadu evergreen to evergreen forests. 600028 India. 3 Kalinga Foundation, Agumbe, Karnataka 577 411 India In India, amphibian research 4 Department of Biology, BASE Educational Services Pvt Ltd, Basavanagudi, Bangalore, Karnataka 560 004 India dates back to 1800s during British 5 33/5267-D, Devika, Golf links Road, Chevayur, Calicut, Kerala 673 017 rule. In India, the British described India amphibians from the areas under [email protected] 1, [email protected]* 2, mgmt@ the British control excluding 3 4 rainforestecology.com , [email protected] , radhakrishnan.zsi@gmail. the regions in India under the 5 com Portuguese rule. Therefore, much information was not available on the amphibians from Goa, at that Goa is one of the smallest south and Arabian Sea towards the time. In post independent India, states of India having an area of west. The total forest area of Goa the first scientific documentation 3701sq.km sharing boundaries is 1424.46sq.km accounting to of the amphibians from Goa is between Maharashtra in the north 38.4% of its geographical area. referable to Sekar (1991). This was and Karnataka in the east and Of the total forest area, 62% is followed by Sekar (1992), Das &

Figure 1. Political boundaries of State Goa and Western Ghats in Goa

8 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Table 1. List of amphibians of Goa, India

Family Species IUCN Status (2012) #

1 Bufonidae Duttaphrynus melanostictus (Schneider, 1799) Least Concern

2 Duttaphrynus stomaticus (Lutken, 1862) Least Concern

3 Pedostibes tuberculosus Gunther, 1875 Endangered

4 Dicroglossidae Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis (Schneider, 1799) Least Concern

5 Euphlyctis hexadactylus (Lesson, 1834) Least Concern

6 Fejervarya brevipalmata (Peters, 1871) Data Deficient

7 Fejervarya caperata Kuramoto, Joshy, Kurabayashi and Sumida, 2007* Not Assessed

8 Fejervarya granosa Kuramoto, Joshy, Kurabayashi and Sumida, 2007* Not Assessed

9 Fejervarya rufescens (Jerdon, 1854) Least Concern

10 Fejervarya syhadrensis (Annandale, 1919) Least Concern

11 Hoplobatrachus tigerinus (Daudin, 1802) Least Concern

12 Minervarya cf. sahyadris Dubois, Ohler and Biju, 2001* Endangered

13 Sphaerotheca breviceps (Schneider, 1799) Least Concern

14 Microhylidae Microhyla ornata (Dumeril and Bibron, 1841) Least Concern

15 Microhyla rubra (Jerdon, 1854) Least Concern

16 Ramanella mormorata Rao, 1937 Endangered

17 Uperodon globulosus (Gunther, 1864) Least Concern Nyctibatrachus danieli Biju, Bocxlaer, Mahony, Dinesh, Radhakrishnan, 18 Nyctibatrachidae Not Assessed Zachariah, Giri and Bossuyt 2011* 19 Nyctibatrachus humayuni Bhaduri and Kripalani, 1955* Vulnerable 20 Nyctibatrachus petraeus Das and Kunte, 2005 Least concern

21 Ranidae Clinotarsus curtipes (Jerdon, 1853)* Near Threatened

22 Hylarana malabarica (Tschudi, 1838)* Least Concern

23 Hylarana temporalis (Gunther, 1864)* Near Threatened

24 Ranixalidae Indirana beddomii (Gunther, 1875) Least Concern

25 Indirana leithii (Boulenger, 1888)* Vulnerable

26 Rhacophoridae Polypedates maculatus (Gray, 1834) Least Concern

27 Pseudophilautus amboli (Biju and Bossuyt, 2009)* Critically endangered

28 Raorchestes bombayensis (Annandale, 1919) Vulnerable

29 Rhacophorus malabaricus Jerdon, 1870 Least Concern

30 Indotyphlidae Gegeneophis danieli Giri, Wilkinson and Gower, 2003* Data Deficient

31 Gegeneophis goaensis Bhatta, Dinesh, Prashanth and Kulkarni, 2007* Data Deficient

32 Gegeneophis mhadeiensis Bhatta, Dinesh, Prashanth and Kulkarni, 2007* Data Deficient

33 Gegeneophis nadkarnii Bhatta and Prashanth, 2004 Data Deficient

34 Gegeneophis pareshi Giri, Gower, Gaikwad and Wilkinson, 2011* Data Deficient

35 Ichthyophiidae Ichthyophis bombayensis Taylor, 1960* Least Concern

36 Ichthyophis davidi Bhatta, Dinesh, Prashanth, Kulkarni and Radhakrishan, 2011* Data Deficient

# http://www.iucnredlist.org, * present report

8 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Figure 1. IUCN red list status for Amphibians of Goa, India fuscus; Micrixalus opisthorhodus; Philautus leucorhinus; Rhacophorus pleurostictus and Gegeneophis ramaswami in the state of Goa. Our findings suggest that Ramanella montana is restricted to southern Karnataka and northern Kerala areas of Western Ghats; the distribution of Fejervarya limnocharis in India is doubtful (Frost 2011); Fejervarya keralensis is known from south of Palghat gap; Micrixlaus fuscus is known to be distributed to the south of Endangered Critically Endangered Data Deficient the Palghat Gap and Micrixalus Least Concern Near Threatened Not Assessed opisthorhodus is known from the

Vulnerable Nilgiri hill complex (reports of two species of Micrixalus in the Amboli Hills adjacent to the political boundaries of Goa may represent species new to science and are Whittekar’s (1997, 1998), Abdulali Goa is scattered and during our not considered here); Philautus & Sekar’s (1998), Bhat & Desai search for limbless amphibians leucorhinus is restricted to Sri (1998), Sarkar & Ray (2004). in Goa since the year 2004 Lanka; Rhacophorus pleurostictus In the recent past, Kamble (2008) we noticed a few additions and is the synonym of Polypedates published a list of amphibians for deletions to be made in the list of variabilis (now Ghatixalus variabilis) Goa reporting 28 species. Kamble (2008). Accordingly, an and is restricted to southern attempt has been made here to enlist Western Ghats and Gegeneophis The first new species of all the known species of amphibians ramaswami is known only from amphibian described from Goa is from Goa State (Map 1) state based south of the Palghat Gap. Although Gegeneophis nadakarnii described on the available literature and our the present list is not exhaustive by Bhatta and Prashanth (2004) field sightings (marked * in Table 1). for Goa, we suggest a systematic from the surroundings of Bondla The nomenclature followed here is sampling from the entire state Wildlife Sanctuary. This was followed after Frost (2011). covering the varied habitats for by the description of Gegeneophis amphibians. goaensis by Bhatta et al. (2007) Discussion from Keri and Gegeneophis pareshi As per the IUCN (2012) by Giri et al. (2012) near Cotigao Kamble (2008) considered Red List, 46% of the species Wildlife Sanctuary. the distribution of Ramanella are considered Least concern; montana; Fejervarya limnocharis; 22% as Data Deficient; 8% Information on amphibians of Fejervarya keralensis; Micrixlaus Endangered; 8% Vulnerable; 3%

9 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Plate I: Amphibians of Goa

Pedostibes tuberculosus Fejervarya rufescens Hoplobatrachus tigerinus

Minervarya sahyadris Sphaerotheca breviceps Microhyla ornata

Ramanella mormorata Nyctibatrachus danieli Nyctibatrachus humayuni

Nyctibatrachus petraeus Hylarana malabarica Hylarana temporalis

10 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Plate 2: Amphibians of Goa

Indirana beddomei Indirana leithii Polypedates maculatus

Pseudophilautus amboli Raorchestes bombayensis Rhacophorus malabaricus

Gegeneophis danieli Gegeneophis goaensis

Gegeneophis mhadeiensis Gegeneophis pareshi

Gegeneophis nadkarnii Ichthyophis bombayensis Ichthyophis davidi 11 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Critically Endangered; 5% Near Agumbe for encouragement. Rao, 1937 (Anura: Microhylidae). Threatened and 8% of the species GB thanks the Director, BASE, Alytes 15(3): 127-132. are not assessed. Pseudophilautus Bangalore for support. We are Das, I. & R. Whitaker (1998). Geographical distribution Pedostibes amboli is treated as Critically indebted to, David V. Raju, tuberculosus (Malbar tree toad). Endangered though the species Devadatta Naik, K.V. Gururaja, Herpetological review 29: 173. is well distributed in all of Goa Sachin Rai, K.A. Subramaniyan, Frost, D.R. (2011). Amphibian Species and central Karnataka areas Varad Giri and Vikram Hosing for of the World: an Online Reference. of Western Ghats and similarly, sharing few amphibian photographs Version 5.5 (31 January, 2011). Pedostibes tuberculosus is treated for publication. We thank the forest Electronic Database accessible as Endangered though the species officials of Goa State for their help at http://research.amnh.org/vz/ herpetology/amphibia/American is known to have a well established and support in our field work. Museum of Natural History, New distribution from Maharashtra to York, USA. southern Kerala areas of Western References Giri, V., D.J. Gower, K. Gaikwad & M. Ghats. To clear such ambiguity, Wilkinson (2011). A second species amphibians in India need thorough Abdulali, H. & G. Sekar (1998). On of Gegeneophis Peters (Amphibia: field work based assessment in the a small collection of amphibians from Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) lacking near future. Goa. Journal of Bombay Natural secondary annular grooves. Zootaxa History Society 85: 202-205 2815; 49-58. Bhat, S. & P.V. Desai (1998). Ecology IUCN (2012). IUCN Red List of In the current checklist we have of some amphibians in the state of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. enlisted 36 species of amphibians Goa. Frogleg 3(1): 2. Electronic database accessible at categorized under nine families and Bhatta, G. & P. Prashanth (2004). www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 18 genera from Goa. Gegeneophis nadakarnii – a caecilian 30 December 2012. (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) Kamble, S.S. (2008). Amphibia. Acknowledgements from Bondla Wildlife Sanctuary, Fauna of Goa, State Fauna Series Western Ghats. Current Science 16, Zoological Survey of India. 273- 87(3): 388-392. 280. Nirmal Kulkarni thanks Trustees Bhatta, G., K.P. Dinesh, P. Prashanth Sarkar, A.K & S. Ray (2004). A Board of Mhadei Research Station & N.U. Kulkarni (2007). A synopsis of the amphibians fauna of for support. KPD and CR thank new species of Gegeneophis Peters Goa. Hamadryad 28(1&2): 7-18. the Director, ZSI Kolkata for (Amphibia: Gymnophiona: Caeciliidae) Sekar, A.G (1991). Key to the amphibian encouragement and facilities and from Goa, India. Zootaxa 1409: 51- fauna of Goa. Herpeton 4: 14-15. PP thanks the Director, Agumbe 59. Sekar, A.G (1992). Additions to the list Das, I. & R. Whitaker (1997). A re- of amphibian fauna of Goa. Journal of Rainforest Research Station, description of Ramanella mormorata Bombay Natural History Society 89: 134-135

12 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

A Preliminary Study on the Anurans in Three Different Material & Methods Habitats of Karnataka Study area

S. Ramakrishna1, P. Deepak2*, M. Shekar3, K.V. Shashikala4, S. For the present study three Poornima5 & M.Jayashankar6 different sites from Karnataka were selected, two in Bengaluru Urban 1,2,3,4,5 Department of Zoology, Bangalore University, Bengaluru, District Jnana Bharathi Campus, Karnataka 560056. Bangalore University (Bangalore 6Research Associate, Division of Entomology and Nematology, Indian Institute South Taluk); Pearl Valley, Anekal of Horticultural Research, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560089. [email protected] 1, [email protected]* 2, shekarchinu1989@gmail. range, Bannerghatta National park com 3, [email protected] 4, [email protected] 5, jay81zo- (Anekal Taluk) and Gundia region [email protected] 6 (Addahole- Kemphole tributaries of Kumaradhara River), Puttur Taluk, Dakshina Kannada of Western Ghats were selected. The GPS Amphibians are a highly diverse amphibians that aid in indicating coordinates of all three sites are group of vertebrates represented habitat fragmentation, ecosystem listed in Table 1. by as many as 7,032 recognized stress, impact of pesticides species found occurring in virtually and various anthropogenic These three regions were all terrestrial and freshwater activities. Evident from perusal of selected on the basis of the following habitats of the globe; present literature, there was insufficient data reasons, Jnana Bharathi Campus is anuran diversity is described in 54 available on the anuran diversity the green spots in rapidly urbanizing families and more than 6,202 from the Bangalore region, a rapidly Bengaluru; Bannerghatta National species (www.amphibiaweb.org). In growing metropolis (Karthikeyan Park is one of the protected areas India, particularly Western Ghats is 1999; www.slideshare.net). Hence, adjacent to Bengaluru city and one of the major global hot spots the present study was designed to Gundia a pristine natural habitat of anuran diversity with more than contribute to the understanding of Western Ghats which is one of 167 anuran species (Zacharias of the local diversity of anuran the biodiversity hotspot of India. & Bhardwaj 1996; Dinesh & populations in three different All selected sites are green zones Radhakrishnan 2011) and many habitats of Karnataka. exhibiting heterogeneity in terms more are still to be described in of habitat composition, one being different parts of India (Karthikeyan et al. 2006; Vyas 2008).

Serving as crucial secondary Table 1. Study sites and their global positioning system (GPS) co-ordinates consumers in their ecosystems, amphibians both as tadpoles and Sl. No Study Site Lat, Long Jnana Bharathi Campus, Bangalore University, adults are regarded as ecological 1 12°56′N 77°30'E Bengaluru indicators due to high degree Pearl Valley, Anekal range, Bannerghatta National 2 12°41'N 77°39′E of sensitivity to changes in the Park, Bengaluru environment (Ranjini & Raman 3 Western Ghats, Gundia, Dakshin Kannada District 12°49'N 75°34'E 2012). It is such responses of the

13 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Table 2. List of anurans recorded in different sites during the study along with their numerical strength, conservation status and family

No. of visits Study IUCN Species Family Site I II III Red List

Duttaphrynus melanostictus 5 2 1 LC Bufonidae Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis 23 16 10 LC Dicroglossidae Fejervarya sp.1 14 4 3 NA Dicroglossidae Fejervarya sp.2 12 7 2 NA Dicroglossidae ANEKAL Microhyla ornata 2 1 0 LC Microhylidae Polypedates maculatus 1 0 0 LC Rhacophoridae Anuran species of Jnana Bharathi, Bangalore University (JBBU). SITE 1-JBBU(Department of Zoology) Duttaphrynus melanostictus 11 9 7 LC Bufonidae Microhyla ornata 3 1 0 LC Microhylidae Ramanella variegata 1 2 2 LC Microhylidae Polypedates maculates 0 0 1 LC Rhacophoridae Anuran species of Jnana Bharathi, Bangalore University (JBBU). SITE 2 (Water Catchment Area-1) Duttaphrynus melanostictus 7 2 0 LC Bufonidae Fejervarya sp.3 12 8 0 LC Dicroglossidae Microhyla ornata 21 15 0 LC Microhylidae Anuran species of Jnana Bharathi, Bangalore University (JBBU). SITE 3 (WCA-2) Fejervarya aff. granosa 5 7 8 NE Dicroglossidae Fejervarya aff. rufescens 1 0 0 NA Dicroglossidae Fejervarya sp.3 4 8 8 LC Dicroglossidae

BANGALORE UNIVERSITY Microhyla ornata 23 22 14 LC Microhylidae Anuran species of Jnana Bharathi, Bangalore University (JBBU). SITE 4 (Grassy Patch) Fejervarya aff. granosa 142 54 14 NE Dicroglossidae Fejervarya aff. rufescens 1 0 2 LC Dicroglossidae Fejervarya sp.3 27 15 6 LC Dicroglossidae Microhyla ornata 59 20 11 LC Microhylidae Anuran species recorded during the survey in Gundia region Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis 0 14 10 LC Dicroglossidae Fejervarya caperata 0 43 16 NA Dicroglossidae Hylarana temporalis 2 103 100 NT Ranidae Indirana beddomii 0 17 15 NA Ranixalidae Indirana gundia 0 16 14 CR Ranixalidae

GUNDIA Micrixalus saxicola 0 12 4 VU Micrixalidae Minervarya sahyadris 0 18 14 EN Dicroglossidae Nyctibatrachus kempholeyensis 0 13 7 DD Nyctibatrachidae Pseudophilautus amboli 0 7 2 CR Rhacophoridae

14 frog leg | #19 | August 2013 P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P.

Image 1. Duttaphrynus melanostictus Image 2. Euphlyctis cyanophlychtis Image 3. Fejervarya sp. 1.

a relatively undisturbed tropical by Daniels (2005). Since the the same sites unharmed. The forest (Gundia) and the others study sites include protected areas, specimens were initially identified in Bengaluru region prone to due permission was sought from using Daniels (2005). anthropogenic disturbances. the concerned forest department authorities. Results & Discussion The present study is based on the field work carried out in the Specimens were recorded by Species of amphibians recorded study sites during January–March from their burrowing/aestivating during the field survey and their 2012 in the day (6-9 am) and sites from the collection sites conservation status according (4-9 pm). Three visits were made to during the duration coinciding with to IUCN Red List of Threatened the selected study sites. During the off season (summer) in the selected course of the survey, 3-5 hr time- areas. Specimens were collected constrained search for anurans in using appropriate field gadgets the study sites was undertaken in including nets incurring no damage Image 4. Fejervarya sp. 2 supplementation with opportunistic to them during the observations. search. Both the survey methods For further identification, the were adopted according to Daniels individuals were photographed;

(2005). Survey was carried out using digital camera Canon power DEEPAK P. near water bodies and micro- shot A2300 IS. With gloved habitats such as on the floor, hand, specimens were examined rocks, leaves, under leaf litter, morphologically in the field and under logs, under the soil, among after the required morphometric dried leaves, among weeds, near and diversity assessment; the termite mounds etc. as explained specimens were released to

15 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Pie-charts indicating species strength in Pearl Valley, Anekal region (Fig. 1); JBBU (Department of Zoology) (Fig. 2); JBBU (Water Catchment Area-1) (Fig. 3); JBBU (Water Catchment Area-2) (Fig. 4); JBBU (Grassy Patch) (Fig. 5); Gundia region (Fig. 6).

Figure 1 Figure 2

Figure 3 Figure 4

Figure 5 Figure 6

Species Version 2012.2. http:// figure 1), Jnana Bharathi campus deep burrows. The F. aff. granosa iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 31 (Images 1, 5–8, figures 2-5) and found in the JBBU site 4 (Grassy October 2012 (www.iucnredlist. Gundia (Images 2, 9–17, figure patch) most of the frogs were org) are tabulated (Table 2), also 6). Individuals of D. melanostictus aestivating under the rocks which the individual numerical strength found in the JBBU Campus site 1 were moist. The M. ornata in the are represented in pie-charts region (Dept. of Zoology) were fully grown JBBU site 2 (WCA 1) and site 3 wise viz., Pearl Valley (Images I–6, adults which were aestivating in (WCA 2) were very small and they

16 frog leg | #19 | August 2013 P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P.

Image 5. Microhyla ornata Image 6. Polypedatus maculatus Image 7. Fejervarya aff. granosa

were aestivating in the cracks and in leaf litters, stones and logs lying Hylarana temporalis, Indirana crevices of the study site. While the adjacent to the river. beddomii, Indirana gundia, Micrixalus samples recorded in Pearl Valley A total of 10 species viz., saxicola, Minervarya sahyadris, study site were observed both in Duttaphrynus melanostictus, Nyctibatrachus kempholeyensis the water body and surrounding Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis, Fejervarya and Pseudophilautus amboli from stony banks. The sampling sp.1, Fejervarya sp.2, Microhyla Gundia region of Western Ghats undertaken with prior permission ornata, Polypedates maculates, were recorded during the present of the forest department in the Ramanella variegata, Fejervarya study, thus indicating a higher Addahole-Kemphole tributaries of sp.3, Fejervarya aff. granosa and diversity in Gundia region, Western Kumaradhara River were an off- Fejervarya aff. rufescens from two Ghats even during the off-season. seasonal occurrences. The anurans selected sites in Bengaluru region Other than the above mentioned were found in the immediate and nine species viz., Euphlyctis species larvae of Clinotarsus margins of the lotic ecosystems, cyanophlyctis, Fejervarya caperata, curtipes were recorded during the

Image 8. Fejervarya sp. 3 Image 9. Fejervarya caperata Image 10. Hylarana temporalis P. DEEPAK P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P.

2 frog leg | #19 | August 2013 P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P.

Image 11. Indirana beddomeii Image 12. Indirana gundia Image 13. Micrixalus saxicola

study. surveys in the selected areas. We Karthikeyan, S. (1999). The fauna are also grateful to Dr. Gururaja, of Bangalore - the vertebrates and The present work coincided with Dr. Dinesh and Mr. Varun (IISc) butterflies of Bangalore: A checklist, World Wide Fund for Nature – India, the off-season of the anuran life for their valuable suggestions and Karnataka State Office, Bangalore. cycle, the present findings therefore wish to express our gratitude to the Karthikeyan, V., A. Kumar & R. add to the data of anuran studies trackers of the forest department. Chellam (2006). Species turnover: from Karnataka, particularly for the case of stream amphibians of Bangalore region, with scarce data. References rainforests in the Western Ghats, Since anthropogenic pressures southern India. (Special issue: Marine, are influencing the study sites as Andrews, M.I., S. George & J. Jaimon freshwater, and wetlands biodiversity conservation. Biodiversity and observed during the field surveys (2005). Amphibians in protected areas of Kerala. Zoos’ Print Journal Conservation 15: (11): 3515-3525. necessary measures concerning 20(4): 1823-1831. Phillips, K. (1994). Tracking the bio-monitoring and conservation Daniels, R.J.R. (2005). Amphibians vanishing Frogs. New York: Penguin needs to be undertaken by of Peninsular India. University press, Books. ISBN 0-14-024646-0. concerned authorities. Further India. Ranjini, M. & T. R.S. Raman (2012). studies in future encompassing long Dinesh, K.P. & C. Radhakrishnan Streamside amphibian communities in term diversity assessments and (2011). Checklist of amphibians of eco-biological observations needs Western Ghats. Frog Leg 16: 15-20. Donnelly, M.A. & M.L. Crump to be undertaken to overcome the (1998). Potential Effects of Climate Image 14. Minervarya sahyadris aforesaid short comings. Change on Two Neotropical Amphibian Assemblages. Climatic Change 39(2- Acknowledgements 3): 541-561. Hulme, M. & D. Viner (1998). A The authors are thankful to climate change scenario for the tropics. Principal Chief Conservator of Climatic Change 39: 145-176. IUCN (2012). IUCN Red List of Forests (Wildlife) and Chief Wildlife Threatened Species. Version 2012.12. Warden, Karnataka, for granting . Downloaded the permission to conduct the field on 31 October 2012.

18 P. DEEPAK P. frog leg | #19 | August 2013 P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P. P. DEEPAK P.

Image 15. Nyctibatrachus kempholeyensis Image 16. Pseudophilautus amboli Image 17. Clinotarsus curtipes tadpoles

plantations and a rainforest fragment (2004). Status and trends of fauna of Periyar Tiger Reserve in the Anamalai hills, India. (Special amphibian declines and extinctions Thekkady, Kerala, South India. Indian Issue: CEPF Western Ghats Special worldwide. Science 306 : 1783– Forester 122(3): 247-249. Series. Journal of Threatened Taxa 1786. 4(9): 2849-2856 Suman, P. (2011). Threat to amphibian Websites Seshadri, K.S. A. Yadav & K.V. population in district Midnapore, www.amphibiaweb.org Gururaja (2009). Road kills of West Bengal (India). Indian Forester www.googleearth.com amphibians in different land use areas 137(10): 1230-1231. www.iucnredlist.org from Sharavathi river basin, central Vyas, R. (2008). Review of the www.savethefrogs.com Western Ghats, India. Journal of current diversity and richness of zsi.gov.in/checklist/Amphibia_final Threatened Taxa 1(11): 549-552. amphibians of Gujarat, India. Indian www.slideshare.net/.../influence-of- Stuart, S.N., J.S. Chanson, N.A. Cox Forester 134(10): 1381-1392 urbanrural-gradient-on-wetlands-of- Young, B.E. Rodrigues, A.S.L. Zacharias, V.J. & A.K. Bhardwaj bangalore Fischman, D.L. & R.W. Waller (1996). A preliminary list of amphibian

Announcing SAVE THE FROGS! Academy free online classes

I am pleased to inform that SAVE THE FROGS! Academy classes start up in full force this sunday, 11 August 2013. SAVE THE FROGS! Academy is the absolute best was for you to increase your knowledge about amphibians and to make a tangible contribution to worldwide amphibian conservation efforts. I strongly encourage you to attend these free, online classes, in which you will learn the ins and outsof our campaigns and educational efforts, and learn many ways that you can take part in our efforts. I have posted class descriptions and registration info below:

- SAVE THE FROGS! Academy classes will now take place twice weekly, every week. - Classes are accessible online from anywhere in the world with internet. - Classes are 100% FREE, thanks to the extremely generous support of our fantastic donors. - Classes are open to frog lovers of all ages and nationalities. - You can attend as many or as few classes as you like without commitment.

SAVE THE FROGS! Academy classes will take place Sundays at 5pm and Wednesdays at 11 a.m. (San Francisco time). That means regardsless of your schedule you should be able to attend one class per week. We will also be archiving all classes on the SAVE THE FROGS! You Tube Channel (http://www.youtube.com/savethefrogs), so you can easily catch up on the classes you miss! http://savethefrogs.com/academy/; http://savethefrogs.com/academy/classes.html

Dr. Kerry Kriger : [email protected] 19 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Diversity of Anuran Fauna in Mangalore Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District, Karnataka, India

Vijay Mala Nair1* and K. Santhosh Kumar2

1 & 2 Department of Research and Studies in Applied Zoology, Mangalore University, Mangalagangothri, Karnataka 574 199 Image 1. Duttaphrynus melanostictus [email protected] 1*, [email protected] 2

to changes via contamination The amphibian (caecilians, insects and their therapeutical of their habitats. Frost (2011) salamanders and anurans) fauna value (Dinesh et al. 2009; Tseng recorded 5,966 anurans among of India is very diverse and play a et al. 2010). Semi-permeable skin, 6,771 species of amphibians in the major role in ecosystem functioning, amniotic eggs and the biphasic life world and in India, a total of 295 especially as consumers of pest make them particularly vulnerable anurans among 330 amphibians. The Western Ghats, biodiversity hotspot of India harbors as many Figure 1: The map showing open scrub and sparse vegetation, drainages, contour of as 157 species of amphibians the surveyed villages situated south of Netravathi river, Dakshina Kannada district, Karnataka, India. which includes 134 anurans and 112 endemic species (Dinesh & Radhakrishnan 2011).

Numerous studies have documented anurans in the Karnataka portion of the Western Ghats (Uttangi 1989; Daniels 1992; Dutta & Ray 2000; Krishnamurthy & Hussain 2000; Manjunatha Reddy et al. 2001; Aravind 2002; Krishnamurthy 2003; Das & Kunte 2005; Dinesh et al. 2007; Seshadri et al. 2009; Molur & Molur 2010; Hegde & Bhat 2011; Purushotham & Tapley 2011; Gururaja & Ramachandra 2012; Hegde 2012; Rathod & Rathod 2013). However, the documentation of anurans from the Mangalore Taluk

19

frog leg | #19 | August 2013

the morphological features and the structure of advertisement calls (Kuramoto & Joshy 2001; Kuramoto et al. 2007), molecular and morphological studies on genus Euphylictus (Joshy et al. 2009), presence of deformities in the case of Fejervarya rufescens and Indirana beddomii (Nair &

Kumar 2005, 2007) and sexual Image 2. Euphlyctis aloysii dimorphic features of fungoid frog Hylarana malabarica (Nair & Figure 2. Percent distribution of representative families of sighted anurans Kumar 2010) from Konaje. from certain localities covering four The presence of a good from 22.76–99.44 cm during villages in Mangalore Taluk, Karnataka. Dicroglossidae family is represented population of amphibians in a the monsoon (June to September) maximally in all the four villages viz: region is an indication of a healthy during March 2003 to December Harekala, Pavuru, Pajiru and Konaje. environment (Gururaja et al. 2006. The temperature recorded 2008). In context, the present varied from 17.8 to 37.1˚C and study aimed to document and humidity ranged from 25 to 100 in Dakshina Kannada District of the compares the anuran diversity of %. state is scanty. Existing literature four villages (Harekala, Pavuru, documents the presence of the Pajiru and Konaje) in Mangalore The study area consist burrowing frog, Sphaerotheca Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District, predominately of an open and dobsonii in Mangalore (Boulenger Karnataka. sparse scrub forest, paddy 1882). Research on anurans from fields (food crop Oryza sativa), certain localities (Kadri, Padil, Material and Methods trees (Hopea ponga, Terminalia Bajipe, Adyar and Karnoor) in Study area Mangalore Taluk have documented The study area (14,370 acres) lies between 12º47’47”N to Figure 3. Bray-Curtis similarity level based on richness of anuran species encountered in certain localties of 12º52’20”N & 74º53’14”E four villages (Harekala, Pavuru, Pajiru and Konaje), Image 3. Fejervarya caperata to 74º57’50”E covers four Mangalore Taluk, Karnataka. villages (Harekala, Pavuru, Pajiru and Konaje) encompassing varied topography and forest cover (Fig. 1 and Table 1) situated south of Netravathi River in Mangalore Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District of Karnataka.. The altitude ranges from 20–160 m. The area receives an average rainfall ranging

21 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Image 4. Fejervarya rufescens

Figure 4: IUCN status of anurans recorded from certain localties of four villages viz: Harekala, Pavuru, Pajiru and Konaje, Mangalore Taluk, Karnataka.

paniculata, Alstonia scholaris, rainy season at dawn and dusk. identification keys (Boulenger Terminalia tomentosa, Syzygium The anurans were detected based 1890; Rao 1937; Daniel 1963a, caryophyllatum, Mimusops on visual encounter and through 1963b, 1975; Daniel & Sekar elengi), cultivated endemic plants their auditory call. Certain parts of 1989; Daniel 1997a, b, c; Chanda of Western Ghats (Shetty & the study area could not be explored 2002; Daniels 2005) and Kaveriappa 2001), plantation crops due to very steep slopes and thick were released after recording (areca Areca catechu; coconut vegetation.The anurans sighted at morphometric data viz: Snout- Cocos nucifera; cultivated plants certain localities viz: Gramachavadi vent length (SVL - from tip of such as — cashew Anacardium in Harekala Village; Pavuru and snout to posterior margin of vent); occidentale; mango Mangifera Inoli in Pavuru Village; Pajiru and Head length (HL – distance from indica; banana Musa paradisica; Kambla Padavu in Pajiru Village; cranial ridge to snout tip); Head acacia Acacia auriculiformis; Adkare, Parande, Kodijal, Mulara, width (HW – widest part of the eucalyptus Eucalyptus globulus; Mangalore University campus and head); Snout length (SL – distance casuarina Casuarina equisetifolia), Pattori in Konaje Village (Fig 1 & from anterior margin of the eye to and natural/artificial water bodies. Table 2) were hand-picked or caught snout tip);(NED - distance between using aquatic nets. The collected anterior edge of eye and posterior Data collection and analysis individuals were photographed, edge of nostrils); Nostril to snout tip identified using appropriate (NST - distance between anterior The sampling was done randomly particularly during the

Table 1. Bird’s eye view of land use,cover pattern (%) and relative number / density ( + : lowest; ++: medium ; +++: high and ++++ : highest ) of four villages (Harekala, Pavuru, Pajiru and Konaje) situated south of Netravathi river in Mangalore taluk, Dakshina Kannada Image 5. Hoplobatrachus tigerinus district.

Bird’s eye view of land use and cover area % Harekala Pavoor Pajiru Konaje

Barren / little vegetation 10 10 50 10 Paddy fields 20 15 20 10 Natural forest / Canopy cover 70 75 30 80 open scrub vegetation ++ ++++ + +++ sparse vegetation + +++ ++ ++++ Drainages + ++++ ++ +++ Natural water bodies +++ ++++ + ++ Artificial water bodies + + +++ ++++

22 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Table 2: List of anuran species and diversity indices (Shannon-Wiener and Evenness) based on number of species and their representative families recorded from four villages in Mangalore taluk, Dakshina Kannada District.

FAMILY SPECIES PAVURU HAREKALA PAJIRU KONAJE

Bufonidae Duttaphrynus melanostictus* x x √ √ Dicroglossidae Euphlyctis aloysii √ x x √ Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis √ √ √ √ Fejervarya caperata √ √ √ √ Fejervarya rufescens √ x √ √ Hoplobatrachus tigerinus* √ √ √ √ Minervarya sahyadris √ x √ √ Sphaerotheca dobsonii √ x √ √ Microhylidae Microhyla ornata* x x √ √ Ranidae Hylarana aurantiaca* x x √ √ Hylarana malabarica x x √ √ Ranixalidae Indirana beddomii x x √ √ Rhacophoridae Polypedates maculatus* x √ √ √ Polypedates occidentalis* x x √ √ Pseudophilautus wynaadensis* x x √ √ Raorchestes charius* x x x √ Rhacophorus malabaricus* x x √ √ Total number of families 1 2 6 6 Total number of species 7 4 15 17 No. of families 1.529 1.477 Shannon-Wiener index ** ** No. of species 1.665 1.181 1.969 2.542 No. of families 0.7691 0.73 Evenness index ** ** No. of species 0.76 0.82 0.48 0.75

edge of snout and posterior edge (WUE- distance between margin nostrils); Forelimb length (FLL - of nostrils); Eye diameter (ED - to the base of eyelid); Inter-orbital distance from shoulder joint to tip maximum distance between rims width (IOW- shortest distance of longest finger) ; Hindlimb length of eye) ; Tympanum diameter (TD - between eye sockets); Inter-narial (HLL - cloacae to tip of longest maximum distance between rims of width (INW - distance between toe); Femur length (FEL - cloacae tympanum); Width of upper eyelid

Image 7. Microhyla ornata Image 8. Hylarana aurantiaca Image 6. Minervarya sahyadris

23 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Image 9. Hylarana malabarica 1–14), placed under six families viz: Bufonidae, Dicroglossidae, Microhylidae, Ranidae, Ranixalidae and Rhacophoridae (Table 2 & Fig. 2). Nine species are recorded for the first time from the Mangalore Taluk (Table 2).

Family-wise distribution

suggests the highest representation Image 11. Polypedates maculatus of Dicroglossidae in Pavuru and Harekala, whereas the Rachophoridae (mainly arboreal) to knee) and Tibia length (TIL - were represented mostly in Konaje (Table 2) suggest the presence knee to heel) using digital calipers and Pajiru. Species sighted of suitable habitats (Table 1) and (Fisher Scientific) to the nearest represent one family in Pavuru, food availability compared to the 0.01 mm (Table 3). two in Harekala and six in Konaje other two villages (Harekala and and Pajiru (Fig. 2). Habitat-wise Pavuru) that lie in close proximity Shannon-Wiener (Shannon distribution suggest the occurrence to the Netravati river (Fig. 1). The & Weaver 1949) and evenness of anurans representative of varied lesser diversity of anuran species indices are used for comparing habitats (aquatic, semi-aquatic, in Harekala and Pavuru villages diversity between varied habitats terrestrial, burrowing, semi-arboreal may also be due to inundation (Clarke & Warwick 2001). The and arboreal) in Pajiru and Konaje, during high tide which probably evenness index will be zero if while the aquatic, semi-aquatic and be resulting in non availability of the sample in consideration has arboreal anurans were recorded food during inundation. However only one species and would be from Harekala. On the other hand, there could have been an under maximal when all species of the only the aquatic, semi-aquatic and estimation of species at Pavuru sample in consideration have even burrowing species were sighted in and Harekala due to the steeper abundance (Sagar & Singh 1999). Pavuru (Table 2). The high species slopes and dense vegetation that The indices (Shannon-Wiener richness in Konaje and Pajiru could not be surveyed. The details and Evenness) and Bray–Curtis of the morphometric data recorded similarity coefficient values were is as detailed in Table -3. Image 10. Indirana beddomeii generated using PAST software (Hammer 2001). Diversity indices in the present study suggest more or less similar Result and Discussion richness / diversity of anurans in Konaje and Pajiru, the maximum The present study, the first report being in Konaje (Table 2). The from certain localities covering four Bray-Curtis similarity index based villages records the occurrence on shared anuran species richness of 17 species of anurans (Images exhibits that Konaje and Pajiru

24 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Table 3: Morphometric data* (mean ± standard deviation in mm) of anuran species recorded from four villages (Harekala, Pavuru, Pajiru and Konaje), Mangalore Taluk,Dakshina Kannada District.

Species SVL HL HW SL NED NST WUE IOW INW ED TD FL L HLL FEL TIL

68.61 16.14 26.07 4.79 3.32 0.96 5.93 5.04 4 6 4 45.29 29.64 26.36 Duttaphrynus 97.29 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± melanostictus 11.87 4.98 1.61 1.54 0.32 0.25 0.13 0.27 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.81 3.89 2.95

33 9.82 11.64 3.55 2.41 0.64 2.55 1.23 1.91 3 18.91 15.64 14.18 3.5 ± 53.64 ± Euphlyctis aloysii ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± 0.00 11.32 5.46 2.12 2.11 0.47 0.38 0.23 0.42 0.26 0.54 0.00 3.30 2.94 2.60

58.36 17.64 22.14 5.29 3.29 3.86 2 2.64 5 34 93.07 28.36 25.36 Euphlyctis 1.5 ± 4.5 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± cyanophlyctis 0.00 0.00 3.22 0.56 1.11 0.27 0.27 0.24 0.00 0.24 0.00 1.53 4.48 1.21 1.21

32.09 9.24 10.78 4.61 2.43 1.72 2.70 2.00 2.70 3.13 1.78 18.35 55.70 14.20 16.98 Fejervarya ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± caperata 1.70 1.01 1.50 0.37 0.17 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.68 0.25 1.19 5.29 1.47 2.40 38.14 9.5 13.47 3.5 1.97 1.03 3.03 1.97 2.72 4.42 1.92 23.53 60.72 18.22 18.78 Fejervarya ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± rufescens 1.78 0.73 0.67 0.62 0.67 0.21 0.12 0.12 0.35 0.43 0.43 5.28 3.36 1.00 1.73 94.58 12.5 33.42 12.00 2.92 4.92 8.92 6.67 54.33 45.5 47.58 Hoplobatrachus 151.08 ± ± ± ± - - - ± ± ± ± ± ± ± tigerinus ± 23.53 16.85 2.26 5.06 1.82 1.11 0.74 0.80 0.82 10.34 7.34 7.49

20.9 5.3 6.6 2.00 1.00 1.4 1.7 1.5 2.00 1.00 10 29.5 8.3 9.00 Minervarya 0.7 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± sahyadris 0.11 0.77 0.26 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.29 0.26 0.00

62.5 18.63 24.75 7.31 4.31 5.63 3.81 4.38 7.25 3.63 37.94 26.63 23.25 Sphaerotheca 2.5 ± 85.75 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± dobsonii 0.93 5.76 2.39 2.20 1.89 1.65 0.88 0.74 0.59 0.44 0.71 0.35 2.74 2.56 1.58

20.11 4.83 6.11 2.28 1.72 0.37 1.00 2.22 1.86 1.75 11.33 32 8.67 9.56 Microhyla ornata ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± - ± ± ± ± 1.60 0.90 0.82 0.36 0.36 0.09 0.00 0.51 0.22 0.25 1.56 2.19 0.71 0.68

39.75 11.5 10.25 5.00 4.00 0.50 2.75 4.25 3.75 3.75 2.75 28 68.5 18.5 21 Hylarana ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± aurantiaca 2.47 2.12 1.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 2.83 0.71 0.71 1.41

57.42 16.58 19.33 5.92 4.04 1.17 5.29 4.25 4.92 5.79 4.79 35.75 86.75 23.25 26.88 Hylarana ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± malabarica 5.37 1.44 1.23 0.90 0.72 0.39 0.26 0.45 0.42 0.26 0.26 2.42 7.12 2.63 2.30

29 9.88 11.5 4.38 3.00 0.88 2.25 2.75 3.25 3.25 2.25 16.38 14 15.25 Indirana 48.63 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± beddomii 6.26 4.71 1.03 1.00 0.63 0.82 0.25 0.29 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 2.72 1.41 1.71

66 18.57 22.21 7.18 5.14 1.14 5 7.18 4.64 5.96 4.64 40.32 30.93 33.29 Polypedates 106.29 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± maculatus ± 12.36 5.11 1.74 1.37 0.72 0.53 0.31 0.76 0.89 0.41 0.60 0.46 3.32 3.38 2.87

58.17 14.75 18.5 6.42 4.25 1.67 5.25 5.42 4.25 6.15 43.83 29.67 31.92 Polypedates 4.3 ± 98.75 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± occidentalis 0.46 14.72 5.31 2.40 2.41 0.58 0.27 0.41 0.61 0.49 0.42 0.37 9.85 3.88 4.76

22.13 5.75 8.63 3.13 2.13 1.63 2.88 2.25 1.05 12.21 11.04 11.83 Pseudophilautus 0.5 ± 2.6 ± 37.21 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± wynaadensis 0.00 0.18 2.62 2.11 0.45 0.43 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.45 0.09 2.78 0.72 0.98 Raorchestes 22 8 8.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 2 2 2 2.5 1 12 34 9.5 11 charius ** Rhacophorus 41.5 14.5 15.5 6.5 4.5 1.5 2 5 4 4 3 30 76.5 21 22.5 malabaricus**

*Mean of six ; ** only one sample . SVL – snout vent length ; HL – distance from cranial ridge to snout tip; HW – Head width; SL - Snout length; NED - distance between anterior edge of eye and posterior edge of nostrils ; NST- Nostril to snout tip; ED- Eye diameter; TD- Tympanum diameter ; WUE- distance between margin to the base of eyelid; IOW- Inter orbital width; INW- Inter narial width ; FLL- Forelimb length; HLL- Hindlimb length ;FEL- Femur length and TIL- Tibia length

25 frog leg | #19 | August 2013 share similarity at the level of 0.94 Image 13. Pseudophilautus wynaadensis assistance from the Department (Fig. 3). Whereas anuran species of Science and Technology, in Pavuru and Harekala share Government of India (Sanction similarity with other two (Konaje No: SP/SO/C-24/2000) is and Pajiru ) villages at the level of gratefully acknowledged. 0.58 and 0.44 respectively. This points that vegetation and specific References requirements for the survival of anuran species in Konaje and Pajiru Aravind, N.A. (2002). First report of are almost similar and congenial to Micrixalus nudis (Amphibia: Ranidae) from Karnataka, India. Hamadryad sustain the existence of diverse Raorchestes charius and 27(1): 145-146. anurans. Rhacophorus malabaricus reported Boulenger, G.A. (1882). Catalogue of earlier as endemic to Western Ghats the Batrachia Salientia, S. Ecaudata in The percent distribution based (Dinesh & Radhakrishnan 2011) the collection of the British museum, London. 2nd edition. Trustees of the on IUCN status, the anurans have been sighted and recorded British museum. 1-478 pp. recorded in the present study were in this study. However, a recent categorized as 18% endangered, Boulenger, G.A. (1890). Fauna of report documents two of these British India, including Ceylon and 6% vulnerable, 58% least species i.e. Sphaerotheca dobsonii Burma: Reptilia and Batrachia. concerned and 18% data deficient and Polypedates maculatus as not London, 432-541 pp. (Fig. 4). being endemic to the Western Ghats Chanda, S.K. (2002). Handbook alone (Gururaja 2012). The record – Indian amphibians. East India Photocomposing Centre, Kolkata, Anuran species namely of these endemic anuran species in viii+335pp. Euphlyctis aloysii, Fejervarya present study may possibly be due caperata, Fejervarya rufescens, Clarke, K.R. & R.M. Warwick (2001). to close proximity of the study area Changes in marine communities: Minervarya sahyadris, to the Western Ghats and similar an approach to statistical analysis Sphaerotheca dobsonii, Indirana climatic conditions. Thus, there is and interpretation, 2nd edition, beddomii, Polypedates maculatus, a need to record distribution and PREMIERE: plymouth Polypedates occidentalis create awareness pointing to the Daniel, J.C. (1963a). Field Guide to the amphibians of Western India. Journal Pseudophilautus wynaadensis, importance of the amphibians, in particular the anurans which play an important role in maintaining a Image 12. Polypedates occidentalis stable environment. Image 14. Raorchestes sp.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dr. K.P. Dinesh, WGRC, Zoological Survey of India, Calicut for his assistance in the identification of anurans listed and valuable comments that improved the manuscript. Financial

26 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

of Bombay Natural History Society State, Southwest India. Journal of reserve. Sahyadri conservation series- 60: 415-438. Herpetology 39(3): 465 - 470. 8, ENVIS Technical Report 37: 1-57. Daniel, J.C. (1963 b). Field Guide Dinesh, K.P., C. Radhakrishnan, Hammer, O., D.A.T. Harper & to the amphibians of Western India. A.H. Manjunatha Reddy P.D. Ryan (2001). PAST: Journal of Bombay Natural History and K.V. Gururaja (2007). Paleontological statistics software Society 60: 690-702. Nyctibatrachus karnatakaensis nom. package for education and data Daniel, J.C. (1975). Field Guide to the nov., a replacement name for the Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica amphibians of Western India. Journal Giant Wrinkled Frog from the Western 4(1): 1-9. of Bombay Natural History Society Ghats. Current Science 93(2): 246 Hegde V.D. & G. Bhat (2011). First 72: 506-524. - 250. record of Charpa Tree Frog Polypedates Daniel, J.C. & A.G. Sekar (1989). Dinesh, K.P., C. Radhakrishnan, K.V. occidentalis from Karnataka State. Field Guide to the amphibians of Gururaja & G. Bhatta (2009). An Frog leg 15: 10-11. Western India. Journal of Bombay annotated checklist of Amphibia of India Hegde V.D. (2012). Amphibian Fauna Natural History Society 86: 194- with some insights into the patterns of of Arecanut plantation in Kadatoka 202. species discoveries, distribution and (Uttara Kannada) Western Ghats, Daniels, R.R.J. (1992). Range endemism. Records of Zoological Karnataka. Frog leg 18: 10 - 20. extension in some south Indian Survey of India, Occasional Paper No. Joshy, S.H., M.S. Alam, A. amphibians. Hamadryad 17: 40-42. 302: 1–152pp. Kurabayashi, M. Sumida & M. Daniels, R.R.J. (1997a). A Field Guide Dinesh, K.P. & C. Radhakrishnan Kuramoto (2009). Two new to Amphibians of Western Ghats, India. (2011). Checklist of amphibians of species of the genus Euphlyctis Cobra 27:1-25. Western Ghats. Frog leg 16: 15-20. (Anura, Ranidae) from southwestern Daniels, R.R.J. (1997b). A Field Guide Dutta, S.K. & P. Ray (2000). India, revealed by molecular and to Amphibians of Western Ghats, India. Microhyla sholigari, A new species of morphological comparisons. Alytes Cobra 28:1-24. Microhylid frog (Anura: Microhylidae) 26(1-4): 97-116. Daniels, R.R.J. (1997c). A Field Guide from Karnataka, India. Hamadryad Krishnamurthy, S.V. & S.A. Hussain to Amphibians of Western Ghats, India. 25(1): 38-44. (2000). Amphibian fauna of Cobra 29:1-13. Frost, D.R. (2011). Amphibian Species Kudremukh National Park, Western Daniels, R.R.J. (2005). Amphibians of the World: an online reference. Ghats, India. Journal of Bombay of Peninsular India. Universities Press Version 5.5 January, 2011. Electronic Natural History Society 97(3): 436- (India) Private Limited, Hyderabad, xii Database accessible at http: // 439. + 268pp. research. amnh. org/ vz/ herpetology/ Krishnamurthy, S.V. (2003). Das, I & K. Kunte (2005). New amphibia/American Museum of Amphibian assemblages in undisturbed species of Nyctibatrachus (Anura: Natural History, New York, USA. and disturbed areas of Kudremukh Ranidae) from Castle Rock, Karnataka Gururaja, K.V., S. Ali & T.V. National Park, central Western Ghats, Ramachandra (2008). Influence India. Environmental Conservation of land-use changes in river basins 30(3): 274-282. on diversity and distribution of Kuramoto, M. & S.H. Joshy (2001). Image 17. Rhacophorous malabaricus amphibians. In: Environment Education Advertisement call structures of frogs for Ecosystem Conservation. Capital from southwestern India, with some Publishing Company, New Delhi. Ecological and Taxonomic notes. Gururaja, K.V. (2012). Pictorial Guide Current Herpetology 20(2): 85-95. to frogs and toads of the Western Kuramoto, M., S.H. Joshy, A. Ghats. Gubbi Labs Publication: xviii + Kurabayashi & M. Sumida 154 pp. (2007). The genus Fejervarya Gururaja, K.V. & T.V. Ramachandra (Anura: Ranidae) in central Western (2012). Anuran diversity and Ghats, India, with discriptions of distribution in Dandeli Anshi tiger four new cryptic species. Current

27 frog leg | #19 | August 2013

Herpetology 26(2): 81-105. Frog leg 14: 11-15. Threatened Taxa 1(11): 549-552. Manjunatha Reddy, A.H., K.V. Purushotham C.B. & B. Tapley (2011). Shannon, C.E. & W. Weaver Gururaja, M.S. Ravichandran & Checklist of Amphibians: Agumbe (1949). The mathematical theory of S.V. Krishnamurthy (2001). Range Rainforest Research Station. Frog leg communication. University of Illions extension of Ansonia ornata (Gunther, 16: 2-14. Press, Urbana, USA. 1875) and Indirana brachytarsus Rao, C.R.N. (1937). On some new Shetty, B.V. & K.M. Kaveriappa (Gunther, 1875). Hamadryad 26(2): forms of Batrachia from South India. (2001). An arboretum of endemic 358-359. Proceedings of the Indian Academy plants of Western Ghat at Mangalore Molur S. & P. Molur (2010). of Sciences 6(6): 387-427. University campus, Karnataka, India. Rhacophorus lateralis in Madikeri, Rathod, S. & P. Rathod (2013). Zoos’ Print Journal 16(3): 431- Kodagu, Karnataka. Frog leg 14: 6 - Amphibian communities in three 438. 7. different coffee plantation regimes Tseng, A.S., W.S. Beane, J.M. Lemire, Nair, V.M. & K.S. Kumar (2005). in the Western Ghats, India. Journal A. Masi & M. Levin (2010). Deformed frogs - An ecological of Threatened Taxa 5(9): 4404– Induction of vertebrate regeneration by alarm? Frog Leg 12: 2. 4413. a transient sodium current. Journal of Nair, V.M. & K.S. Kumar (2007). Sagar, R. & J.S. Singh (1999). Neuroscience methods 30: 13192– One eye frog, Sphaerotheca rufescens Species diversity and its measurement. 13200. (Jerdon, 1854) from Konaje, The Botanica 49: 9-16. Uttangi, J.C. (1989). Some more Mangalore, Karnataka. Frog leg 13: Seshadri, K.S., A. Yadav & K.V. species of anurans from Dharwad, 10-11. Gururaja (2009). Road kills of North Karnataka. Journal of Bombay Nair, V.M. & K.S. Kumar (2010). amphibians in different land use areas Natural History Society 86: 256- Sexual dimorphism in fungoid frog from Sharavathi river basin, central 257. Hylarana malabarica (Tschudi, 1838). Western Ghats, India. Journal of

ISSN: 2230-7060 (online) No. 19 | August 2013 Editor: Sanjay Molur Edtorial Advisor: Sally Walker frog leg Date of publication: 10 August 2013 ANSA and ASG-SA Co-chairs: Sanjay Molur & Karthikeyan Vasudevan

frog leg is the Newsletter of the Amphibian Network of South Asia (ANSA), the Amphibian Specialist Group-South Asia (ASG-SA), and an education activity under Threatened Taxa.

frog leg is published by WILD, ZOO and CBSG-SA as a service to the amphibian conservation community as well as conservation actioners and enthusiasts of South Asia.

Amphibian Network of South Asia c/o Zoo Outreach Organisation/WILD 96 Kumudham Nagar, Vilankuruchi Road Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641035, India. Ph: +91 422 2665298, 2665450; Fax: +91 422 2665472 Email: [email protected]

frog leg is available online at OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD www.zoosprint.org/Newsletters/frogleg.htm

28