4.6 Article

Red List assessment of amphibian species of Ecuador: A multidimensional approach for their conservation

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 16, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251027

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Conservation of Ecuadorian Amphibians and access to genetic resources-PARG by the Ministry of Environment and Water of Ecuador
  2. PARG
  3. Secretaria Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia del Ecuador (Senescyt-ENSAMBLE) [PIC-17-BENS-001]
  4. The World Academy of Sciences (TWAS) [16-095]
  5. project Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) Amphibian Conservation in the Abra de Zamora Key Biodiversity Area of Ecuador [CEPF-108984]
  6. Senescyt [INEDITA PIC-20-INE-USFQ-001]
  7. Universidad san Francisco de Quito [48, 1057]
  8. International Union for Conservation of Nature IUCN and NatureServe (National Science Foundation's Dimensions of Biodiversity program) [1136586]
  9. Programa Becas de Excelencia, Secretaria de Educacion Superior, Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion (SENESCYT), Ecuador
  10. Collaboration Grant 'Investigacion para la conservacion de especies de anfibios criticamente amenazadas' [HUBI 16871]
  11. COCIBA Grant 'Investigacion y conservacion de las especies criticamente amenazadas de ranas arlequin (Bufonidae: Atelopus spp)' [HUBI 16808]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ecuador is facing severe threats to its diverse amphibian species, with 57% of native species categorized as Threatened. Loss of habitat, agricultural expansion, and other human activities are major contributing factors. Urgent actions are needed to protect threatened species and support conservation efforts.
Ecuador is one of the most biodiverse countries in the world, but faces severe pressures and threats to its natural ecosystems. Numerous species have declined and require to be objectively evaluated and quantified, as a step towards the development of conservation strategies. Herein, we present an updated National Red List Assessment for amphibian species of Ecuador, with one of the most detailed and complete coverages for any Ecuadorian taxonomic group to date. Based on standardized methodologies that integrate taxonomic work, spatial analyses, and ecological niche modeling, we assessed the extinction risk and identified the main threats for all Ecuadorian native amphibians (635 species), using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Our evaluation reveals that 57% (363 species) are categorized as Threatened, 12% (78 species) as Near Threatened, 4% (26 species) as Data Deficient, and 27% (168 species) as Least Concern. Our assessment almost doubles the number of threatened species in comparison with previous evaluations. In addition to habitat loss, the expansion of the agricultural/cattle raising frontier and other anthropogenic threats (roads, human settlements, and mining/oil activities) amplify the incidence of other pressures as relevant predictors of ecological integrity. Potential synergic effects with climate change and emergent diseases (apparently responsible for the sudden declines), had particular importance amongst the threats sustained by Ecuadorian amphibians. Most threatened species are distributed in montane forests and paramo habitats of the Andes, with nearly 10% of them occurring outside the National System of Protected Areas of the Ecuadorian government. Based on our results, we recommend the following actions: (i) An increase of the National System of Protected Areas to include threatened species. (ii) Supporting the ex/in-situ conservation programs to protect species considered like Critically Endangered and Endangered. (iii) Focalizing research efforts towards the description of new species, as well as species currently categorized as Data Deficient (DD) that may turn out to be threatened. The implementation of the described actions is challenging, but urgent, given the current conservation crisis faced by amphibians.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available