October 2012 - Journal of Threatened Taxa

October 2012 | Vol. 4 | No. 13 | Pages 3161–3232
Date of Publication 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Cochin Forest Cane Turtle Vijayachelys silvatica
© Arun Kanagavel
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT 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.

Jo u r n a l o f Th r e a t e n e d Ta x a
Published by
Wildlife Information Liaison Development Society
Typeset and printed at
Zoo Outreach Organisation
96, Kumudham Nagar, Vilankurichi Road, Coimbatore 641035, Tamil Nadu, India
Ph: +91422 2665298, 2665101, 2665450; Fax: +91422 2665472
Email: threatenedtaxa@gmail.com, articlesubmission@threatenedtaxa.org
Website: www.threatenedtaxa.org
EDITORS
Fo u n d e r & Ch i e f Ed i t o r
Dr. Sanjay Molur, Coimbatore, India
Ma n a g in g Ed i t o r
Mr. B. Ravichandran, Coimbatore, India
As s o c ia t e Ed i t o r s
Dr. B.A. Daniel, Coimbatore, India
Dr. Manju Siliwal, Dehra Dun, India
Dr. Meena Venkataraman, Mumbai, India
Ms. Priyanka Iyer, Coimbatore, India
Ed i t o r ia l Ad v i s o r s
Ms. Sally Walker, Coimbatore, India
Dr. Robert C. Lacy, Minnesota, USA
Dr. Russel Mittermeier, Virginia, USA
Dr. Thomas Husband, Rhode Island, USA
Dr. Jacob V. Cheeran, Thrissur, India
Prof. Dr. Mewa Singh, Mysuru, India
Dr. Ulrich Streicher, Oudomsouk, Laos
Mr. Stephen D. Nash, Stony Brook, USA
Dr. Fred Pluthero, Toronto, Canada
Dr. Martin Fisher, Cambridge, UK
Dr. Ulf Gärdenfors, Uppsala, Sweden
Dr. John Fellowes, Hong Kong
Dr. Philip S. Miller, Minnesota, USA
Prof. Dr. Mirco Solé, Brazil
Ed i t o r ia l Bo a r d / Su b j e c t Ed i t o r s
Dr. M. Zornitza Aguilar, Ecuador
Prof. Wasim Ahmad, Aligarh, India
Dr. Sanit Aksornkoae, Bangkok, Thailand.
Dr. Giovanni Amori, Rome, Italy
Dr. István Andrássy, Budapest, Hungary
Dr. Deepak Apte, Mumbai, India
Dr. M. Arunachalam, Alwarkurichi, India
Dr. Aziz Aslan, Antalya, Turkey
Dr. A.K. Asthana, Lucknow, India
Prof. R.K. Avasthi, Rohtak, India
Dr. N.P. Balakrishnan, Coimbatore, India
Dr. Hari Balasubramanian, Arlington, USA
Dr. Maan Barua, Oxford OX , UK
Dr. Aaron M. Bauer, Villanova, USA
Dr. Gopalakrishna K. Bhat, Udupi, India
Dr. S. Bhupathy, Coimbatore, India
Dr. Anwar L. Bilgrami, New Jersey, USA
Dr. Renee M. Borges, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Gill Braulik, Fife, UK
Dr. Prem B. Budha, Kathmandu, Nepal
Mr. Ashok Captain, Pune, India
Dr. Cleofas R. Cervancia, Laguna , Philippines
Dr. Apurba Chakraborty, Guwahati, India
Dr. Kailash Chandra, Jabalpur, India
Dr. Anwaruddin Choudhury, Guwahati, India
Dr. Richard Thomas Corlett, Singapore
Dr. Gabor Csorba, Budapest, Hungary
Dr. Paula E. Cushing, Denver, USA
Dr. Neelesh Naresh Dahanukar, Pune, India
Dr. R.J. Ranjit Daniels, Chennai, India
Dr. A.K. Das, Kolkata, India
Dr. Indraneil Das, Sarawak, Malaysia
Dr. Rema Devi, Chennai, India
Dr. Nishith Dharaiya, Patan, India
Dr. Ansie Dippenaar-Schoeman, Queenswood, South
Africa
Dr. William Dundon, Legnaro, Italy
Dr. Gregory D. Edgecombe, London, UK
Dr. J.L. Ellis, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Susie Ellis, Florida, USA
Dr. Zdenek Faltynek Fric, Czech Republic
Dr. Carl Ferraris, NE Couch St., Portland
Dr. R. Ganesan, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Hemant Ghate, Pune, India
Dr. Dipankar Ghose, New Delhi, India
Dr. Gary A.P. Gibson, Ontario, USA
Dr. M. Gobi, Madurai, India
Dr. Stephan Gollasch, Hamburg, Germany
Dr. Michael J.B. Green, Norwich, UK
Dr. K. Gunathilagaraj, Coimbatore, India
Dr. K.V. Gururaja, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Mark S. Harvey,Welshpool, Australia
Dr. Magdi S. A. El Hawagry, Giza, Egypt
Dr. Mohammad Hayat, Aligarh, India
Prof. Harold F. Heatwole, Raleigh, USA
Dr. V.B. Hosagoudar, Thiruvananthapuram, India
Prof. Fritz Huchermeyer, Onderstepoort, South Africa
Dr. V. Irudayaraj, Tirunelveli, India
Dr. Rajah Jayapal, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Weihong Ji, Auckland, New Zealand
Prof. R. Jindal, Chandigarh, India
Dr. Pierre Jolivet, Bd Soult, France
Dr. Rajiv S. Kalsi, Haryana, India
Dr. Rahul Kaul, Noida,India
Dr. Werner Kaumanns, Eschenweg, Germany
Dr. Paul Pearce-Kelly, Regent’s Park, UK
Dr. P.B. Khare, Lucknow, India
Dr. Vinod Khanna, Dehra Dun, India
Dr. Cecilia Kierulff, São Paulo, Brazil
Dr. Ignacy Kitowski, Lublin, Poland
continued on the back inside cover

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(13): 3161–3172
Fish diversity and assemblage structure in Ken River of
Panna landscape, central India
J.A. Johnson 1 , Ravi Parmar 2 , K. Ramesh 3 , Subharanjan Sen 4 & R. Sreenivasa
Murthy 5
1,2,3,4
Wildlife Institute of India, Post Box # 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun, Uttarkhand 248001, India
5
Panna National Park, Madhya Pradesh 488001, India
Email: 1 jaj@wii.gov.in (corresponding author), 2 envoravi@gmail.com, 3 ramesh@wii.gov.in, 4 ssen@wii.gov.in, 5 rseenu60@gmail.com
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Neelesh Dahanukar
Manuscript details:
Ms # o3024
Received 29 November 2011
Final received 28 September 2012
Finally accepted 05 October 2012
Citation: Johnson, J.A., R. Parmar, K. Ramesh,
S. Sen & R.S. Murthy (2012). Fish diversity and
assemblage structure in Ken River of Panna
landscape, central India. Journal of Threatened
Taxa 4(13): 3161–3172.
Copyright: © J.A. Johnson, Ravi Parmar, K.
Ramesh, Subharanjan Sen & R. Sreenivasa
Murthy 2012. Creative Commons Attribution
3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted
use of this article in any medium for non-profit
purposes, reproduction and distribution by
providing adequate credit to the authors and the
source of publication.
Author Details and Author Contribution: See
end of this article.
Acknowledgements: We are grateful to the
Director and Dean, Wildlife Institute of India
for their support and encouragement. We are
also thankful to the Madhya Pradesh Forest
Department for permitting us to carry out this
study. Constructive comments from anonymous
reviewers in improving the quality of the
manuscript are sincerely appreciated.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7D4EE0FB
-AD34-4EC9-8230-66EF50B87827
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
Abstract: Fish diversity and assemblage structure in relation to habitat variables were
studied in 15 sites in Panna landscape, central India. The sampling was performed
between February–April 2009. Fifty species of fishes belonging to 32 genera, 15 families
and four orders were recorded from the study area. Cyprinids were the dominant
assemblage members in all study streams (abundance ranges from 56.6–94.5 %). The
cyprinid Devario aequipinnatus and the snakehead Channa gachua had highest local
dominance (80% each) in Panna landscape. High Shannon and Margalef’s diversity
was recorded in Madla region of Ken River. Similarity cluster analysis explained the
study sites along Ken River (Gahrighat, Magradabri and Madla) had similar faunal
assemblage. Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) was performed to study
the species association with a set of environmental variables. The CCA revealed that
cyprinid abundance was associated with stream order, deeper habitat, flow and water
temperature.
Keywords: Assemblage structure, central India, environmental variables, fish diversity,
Ken River, Panna landscape.
Introduction
Freshwater ecosystem and their resources are an indispensable part
of human life and activity, and health of those freshwater ecosystems
is visible in the wellbeing of the fish assemblage they support. In lotic
environment, the diversity, community structure and species assemblages
are influenced by various biotic and abiotic variables (Minns 1989). Water
in these habitats may look homogeneous but they are separated by various
environmental factors such as temperature, depth, current and substrates
into a great variety of habitats (Kottelat & Whitten 1997). Each habitat
has its unique fauna which is adapted to the various abiotic features of that
habitat. Identification of such abiotic gradients that result in structuring
of fish assemblages is one of the main challenges for a fish ecologist.
The species richness of a stream within a river basin may be influenced
by local conditions and stream order along a watershed (Grenouillet et
al. 2004). Williams et al. (2003) reported that the historical formation
of a river basin determines the structure of the fish community. The
Panna landscape in north-central Madhya Pradesh is one of the historical
landscapes, located on the Vindhyan Range within the Biogeographic
Province 6A Deccan Peninsula - Central Highlands (Rodgers et al. 2002).
A number of perennial and seasonal streams originate from this landscape
and drain into the Ken River. According to Satpura hypothesis (Hora
1950), the catchment areas of the Ken River basin (Vindhyan Hills) in
central India play a key role in the migratory route of several Western
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172 3161

Fish diversity in Ken River
Ghats fishes. The catchment area of this river basin
is characterized by extensive seasonal and annual
fluctuations of environmental variables.
Variation in habitat variables such as flow, depth,
substrate and water quality may have a significant
impact on both assemblage structure and resource
availability. The influence of habitat structure and
complexity on fish assemblage structure has been
tested mostly in North American streams (Gorman
& Karr 1978; Schlosser 1982, 1985; Capone &
Kushlan 1991) and Australian streams (Bishop &
Forber 1991; Pusey et al. 1993). In India, few studies
have been initiated to document the fish diversity
and assemblage structure along the environmental
gradients (Johnson 1999; Arunachalam 2000; Bhat
2003; 2004; Sreekantha et al. 2007; Shahnawaz et al.
2010). Basic information is also available on fishes
of Ramsagar reservoir and fish assemblages of Betwa
River, Khan and Khashipra rivers of Madya Pradesh
(Ganasan & Hughes 1998; Garg et al. 2007; Lakra
et al. 2010). However, studies on fish diversity and
assemblage structure are still rudimentary in central
and northern India. Therefore, the present study is an
attempt to document the fish assemblage structure in
relation to environmental variables of the Ken River of
Panna landscape in central Indian highland.
Material and Methods
Study area
Ken is one the major rivers of Bundelkhand region
of central India, and flows through the Panna National
Park in Madhya Pradesh (Image 1). It is one of the subbasins
of the Yamuna, and the important tributaries of
this river are Sonar, Bearma, Bewas, Kopra, Urmil and
others. Among these, the Sonar is the largest tributary
that rises in the Vindhyan Hills in the southwest of
Sagar District and flows through its valley in Damoh
District and it travels a distance of 427km and joins
the Yamuna at Chilla Village, near Fatehpur in
Uttar Pradesh (Jain et al. 2007). It cuts through the
landscape from south to north and forms the famous
Ranneh Falls, which is located in the Crocodile Park
(Ken Ghariyal Sanctuary) of Panna National Park.
This river is known as an angler’s paradise, because
the king of freshwater fish Mahseer Tor tor is found in
abundance. The vegetation type in Panna landscape
J.A. Johnson et al.
© K. Ramesh
Image 1. View of Ken River at Gharighat, Panna National
Park, Madhya Pradesh.
is characteristic of tropical dry deciduous element. In
terms of biome characteristics, it is classified as ‘highrainfall
dry deciduous forest’ and is largely dependent
on monsoon rainfall during July–September, which
usually fluctuates within the range of 600–1100 mm
(Jayapal et al. 2007). Following the monsoon, there is
a cool season until February, followed by dry summer
when the temperature often exceeds 45 0 C (Karanth et
al. 2004). Water is a limiting factor during this season,
even though, some stretches of streams inside the
park hold some water as isolated pools. But the main
channel of Ken River retains natural deep pools, rapids
and cascades with heterogeneous riparian cover during
summer, which probably provides shelter for fish when
most of the other streams dry up. A total of 15 sites
on streams/ rivers of the Ken River basin within Panna
National Park were selected for the present study
(Fig. 1) and the summary of site description is given
in Table 1. The sampling was undertaken between
February–April 2009, since during this period most
of the streams inside the park retain minimum surface
flow.
Data collection
Fish sampling was performed in different habitats
such as pools, riffles, runs and cascades in 100m reach
of all study sites, using monofilament gill nets of
different mesh sizes (10–34 mm), drag, scoop and cast
net. Fish sampling protocol followed the method of
Johnson & Arunachalam (2009). After collection, fish
were examined, counted and released back into the
system. A few specimens of unidentified species were
3162
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172

Fish diversity in Ken River
J.A. Johnson et al.
Figure 1. Sampling sites in Panna landscape, Madhya Pradesh.
Table 1. Summary of study sites in Ken River basin of
Panna landscape, Madhya Pradesh.
Site code Sites GPS coordinates
1 Gahrighat 24.47556 0 N & 79.88477 0 E
2 Gahrarnala 24.49955 0 N & 79.88060 0 E
3 Jamunahi 24.59151 0 N & 79.95807 0 E
4 Imalia 24.60248 0 N & 79.99216 0 E
5 Bargadi 24.61274 0 N & 79.92532 0 E
6 Mahuapani 24.61131 0 N & 79.99154 0 E
7 Keerpani 24.61761 0 N & 80.06767 0 E
8 Ghatera 24.62413 0 N & 79.00315 0 E
9 Nararan 24.63804 0 N & 79.91558 0 E
10 Kheriya 24.63782 0 N & 80.00150 0 E
11 Silatanala 24.65147 0 N & 79.96756 0 E
12 Magradabri 24.66810 0 N & 79.96793 0 E
13 Judinala 24.69663 0 N & 79.98927 0 E
14 Madla 24.74175 0 N & 80.00823 0 E
15 Pandav Falls 24.73058 0 N & 80.06748 0 E
preserved in buffered formalin (10%) and transported
to the laboratory for species confirmation. Species
identification and confirmation were carried out using
available literature (Talwar & Jhingran 1991; Jayaram
1999) and the species valid nomenclatural names
were adopted as per the Catalogue of Fishes of the
California Academy of Sciences (Eschmeyer & Fricke
2011). At each sampling site, a set of the following
environmental variables were recorded: stream order,
altitude, stream width (m), water depth (cm), velocity
(m/Sec), water temperature ( 0 C), conductivity (µS/cm)
and riparian cover (%). Riparian cover was estimated
using spherical densiometer. Sampling protocol for
habitat variables followed Pusey et al. (1993).
Analysis
Information on structure of fish assemblages was
extracted by adopting different univariate indices,
namely local distribution index, Margalef’s species
richness index and Shannon diversity index. The
calculation of these indices followed the methods
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172
3163

Fish diversity in Ken River
of Johnson & Arunachalam (2009), and Muchilisin
& Azizah (2009). Local distribution index was
calculated by D= (Ni.st/N.st) x 100, where Ni.st is
total number of sites where the fishes are found; N.st
is total number of sites. Margalef’s species richness
was calculated using the equation R = (S-1)/ln N,
where S is the number of species, N is the total number
of individuals. The Shannon index of diversity was
obtained by the following equation H’ = -∑pi ln (pi),
where pi = ni/N; ni is the number of individuals of ‘i’th
species and N = ∑ni. The indices were used to compare
the species distribution, richness and diversity across
the study sites. Quantitative data of species along
with the number of individuals belonging to each
species were used to calculate percent similarity index
using Bray-Curtis similarity index based on Padhye
et al. (2006). Dendrograms were constructed to
understand the similarity of fish assemblage structure
between the sampling sites. This was done using
Bray-Curtis similarity index using non-transformed
species abundance data (Anderson 2001) using PAST
programme. Further, the species abundance and
environmental variables with separated sites were
submitted to Canonical Correspondence Analysis
(CCA), which is a direct gradient ordination technique
that extracts the best synthetic gradients from field
data on biological communities and environmental
features: it forms a linear combination of environmental
variables that maximally separate the niche of the
species (ter Braak & Verdonschot 1995). It is also
a powerful exploratory tool for simplifying complex
data sets and has the advantage over integrated analysis
of both species and environmental data at each site
(Taylor et al. 1993). In order to reduce the complexity
of ordinance biplot, only cyprinid species were
included in CCA. The resulting species abundanceenvironmental
variables biplot is an ordination
diagram in which species and sites are represented
by points with respect to the supplied explanatory
variables, represented by arrows. The arrows point
in the direction of maximum variation in value of the
corresponding variable. The arrow of a variable runs
from the centre of the diagram to an arrow head, the
coordinates of which are the correlation of the variable
with axes (ter Braak 1986; ter Braak & Verdonschot
1995). The CCA was obtained with XLSTAT® 2012
version programme.
Results
J.A. Johnson et al.
A total of 50 species of primary freshwater fishes
belonging to 32 genera, 15 families and four orders
were recorded from the study area (Table 2). Among
the species, Devario aequipinnatus and Channa
gachua had highest local dominance (80% for each)
followed by Esomus danricus (66.6%) and Garra
mullya (60%). They were represented in most of
the study sites. The Mahseer Tor tor (Image 2) was
recorded from Gahrighat, Magradabri and Madla in
Ken River and also in Pandav Fall Stream. Number
of species, species abundance, cyprinid abundance,
Shannon diversity and Margalef’s richness index for
study sites are given in Table 3. The total number of
species as well as abundance was highest in the Madla
area of Ken River, whereas the lowest was recorded in
Mahuapani Stream. Similarly, the Madla area of Ken
had a high Shannon diversity index (3.48), whereas the
Mahuapani stream registered a low Shannon diversity
index (0.99). Cyprinids were the dominant members
of the assemblage structure in the study area and
comprised 56.6–94.5 % in the assemblage structure.
The maximum cyprinid population was recorded from
Jamunahi stream, while low cyprinid population was
observed in Nararan stream (Table 3). Among the
species, the distribution of 14 species (Acanthacobitis
botia, Clupisoma montana, C. garua, Crossocheilus
latius, Devario devario, Garra gotyla, Glyptothorax
telchitta, Labeo angra, L. rohita, Lepidocephalichthys
guntae, Ompok pabda, Osteobrama cotio,
Pseudambassis baculis and Salmosphasia balookee)
were reported in the Himalayan river system and
they were not reported from peninsular India.
Similarly, three species commonly found in rivers of
peninsular India (Nemacheilus denisoni, Rita gogra
© J.A. Johnson
Image 2. The Mahseer Tor tor, 40cm standard length from
Ken River, Madhya Pradesh
3164
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172

Fish diversity in Ken River
J.A. Johnson et al.
Table 2. List of fish species recorded from the study sites of Ken River basin, Madhya Pradesh.
Species
Sites*
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Cyriniformes
Cyprinidae
Bangana dero 4 - - - - - - - - - - 12 - 16 -
Barilius bendelisis 15 - - - - - - - - - - 10 - 12 -
Cirrhinus mrigala - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 -
Cirrhinus reba - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 -
Gibelion catla 48 - - - - - - - - - - 32 - 14 -
Danio rerio - - - - - - 10 - - - - - - - -
Devario aequipinnatus 32 - - 27 23 14 - 32 22 32 15 35 25 30 18
Devario devario - - - - - - - - - - - 12 - 6 -
Esomus danricus - - 25 12 18 12 17 45 2 43 33 - 31 - -
Garra gotyla 38 - - - - - - - - - - 24 - 12 -
Garra mullya - 24 12 22 - - 15 - - 18 34 - 15 19 42
Crossocheilus latius 22 - - - - - - - - - - 18 - 18 -
Labeo angra 3 - - - - - - - - - - 5 - - -
Labeo calbasu - - - - - - - - - - 10 - 12 -
Labeo pangusia - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 -
Labeo rohita - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 -
Osteobrama cotio - - - - - - - - - - - 21 - 3 -
Rasbora daniconius 12 - 4 13 - - - - 3 8 - 12 14 7 -
Puntius amphibius 10 11 8 - 8 - - - 6 14 13 - - 36 -
Puntius conchonius - - - - 9 - - - 12 - - 24 25 33 -
Puntius sarana - - - - - - - - - - - 2 - 6 -
Puntius sophore - - 3 - - - - - 2 - - - - 7 -
Puntius ticto - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 -
Salmophasia bacaila 18 - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 -
Salmophasia balookee 12 - - - - - - - - - - 28 - 6 -
Salmophasia boopis 8 - - - - - - - - - - 13 - 14 -
Tor tor 23 - - - - - - - - - - 24 - 5 9
Balitoridae
Acanthocobitis botia 4 5 3 8 - - 4 - 3 - - - - - 6
Nemacheilus denisoni 5 - - - - - - - 9 - - 10 - - 12
Cobitidae
Lepidocephalichthys guntea - - - - 4 - - - 8 11 - - 6 - 4
Siluriformes
Bagridae
Mystus cavasius 4 - - - - - - - - 4 - 18 4 30 -
Rita gogra - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 -
Siluridae
Ompok bimaculatus - - - - - - - - - - - 11 - 14 -
Ompok pabda - - - - - - - - - - - 4 8 6 -
Wallago attu - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 -
Schilbeidae
Clupisoma montana - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 -
Clupisoma garua - - - - - - - - - - - - - 14 -
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172
3165

Fish diversity in Ken River
J.A. Johnson et al.
Species
Sites*
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Sisoridae
Glyptothorax telchitta 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 -
Claridae
Clarias magur - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 -
Heteropneustidae
Heteropneustes fossilis - - - - 10 - - 16 - 6 - - 8 - -
Perchiformes
Ambassidae
Pseudambassis baculis 32 - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 -
Pseudambassis ranga - - - - - - - - - - - 34 - 18 -
Nandidae
Nandus nandus - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 -
Gobiidae
Glossogobius giuris - - - - - - - - - - - 4 - 7 -
Channidae
Channa gachua 15 15 - - 12 4 5 14 4 19 18 6 - 4 6
Channa marulius - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 -
Channa punctatus 2 - - - - - - - 10 - - - - 6 -
Channa striatus - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 -
Mastacembelidae
Mastacembelus armatus 1 - - - - - - - 2 - - - - 13 -
Cyprinidontiformes
Belonidae
Xenentodon cancila - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 -
* = 1 - Gahrighat; 2 - Gehranala; 3 - Jamunahi; 4 - Imalia; 5 - Bargadi; 6 - Mahuapani; 7 - Keerpani; 8 - Ghatera; 9 - Nararan; 10 - Kheriya;
11 - Silatanala; 12 - Magradabri; 13 - Judinala; 14 - Madla; 15 - Pandav Falls.
Table 3. Variation in species abundance, cyprinid abundance, Margalef’s richness index and Shannon index in Ken River
basin, Madhya Pradesh.
Site code* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Total number of
species
21 4 6 5 7 3 5 4 12 9 5 23 9 43 7
Individuals 312 55 55 82 84 30 51 107 83 155 113 369 136 444 97
Cyprinids
Abundance
Percentage
of Cyprinids
abundance
Margalef ’s
richness index
245 35 52 74 58 26 42 77 47 115 95 290 110 290 69
78.5 63.6 94.5 90.2 69 86.6 82.3 72 56.6 74.2 84 78.5 80.8 65.3 71.1
3.48 0.75 1.25 0.91 1.35 0.59 1.02 0.64 2.49 1.59 0.85 3.72 1.63 6.89 1.31
Shannon index 2.69 1.26 1.48 1.52 1.82 0.99 1.47 1.28 2.2 1.97 1.53 2.94 2.01 3.48 1.63
* = 1 - Gahrighat; 2 - Gehranala; 3 - Jamunahi; 4 - Imalia; 5 - Bargadi; 6 - Mahuapani; 7 - Keerpani; 8 - Ghatera; 9 - Nararan; 10 - Kheriya;
11 - Silatanala; 12 - Magradabri; 13 - Judinala; 14 - Madla; 15 - Pandav Falls.
and Salmosphasia boopis) were recorded for the first
time in the Yamuna River basin. Thus, short notes on
meristic and morphometric features of new records are
given at this section.
Notes on new records (Image 3 a–c)
Salmosphasia boopis: Body elongate and laterally
compressed. Body scales large, 40–41 scales present
across the lateral line. Dorsal fin inserted well anterior
3166
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172

Fish diversity in Ken River
J.A. Johnson et al.
a
© J.A. Johnson
b
© J.A. Johnson
c
Gahrighat
Madla
Magradabri
Keerpani
Jamunahi
Mahuapani
Kheriya
Ghatera
Bargadi
Silatanala
Judinala
Imalia
Nararan
Gehranala
Pandav Falls
1 0.5 0
Similarity
Figure 2. Dendrogram resulting from Bray-Curtis
similarities of species abundance data of study sites.
Image 3. New records to Ken River, Madhya Pradesh
a - Salmophasia boopis; b - Nemacheilus denisoni;
c - Rita gogra.
© J.A. Johnson
to the origin of anal fin. Fin rays counts: dorsal - iii/7;
pectoral - i/14; pelvic - i/8; anal - iii/12.
Nemacheilus denisoni: Body loach-like, marked
with 12 broad vertical bands and a black band at the
base of caudal fin. A black spot present at base of origin
of dorsal fin and rows of small spots also present on
dorsal and caudal fins. Fin rays counts: dorsal - iii/8;
pectoral - i/8; pelvic - i/7; anal - iii/5.
Rita gogra: Head depressed, occipital process
subcutaneous, extends to predorsal plate. Dorsal
and pectoral fins bear strong osseous spine. Barbels
three pairs, maxillary barbel extends to operculum.
Mandible reaches base of pectoral fin and nasal barbel
short. Fin rays counts: dorsal - i/6; pectoral - i/10;
pelvic - i/7; anal - iii/9.
Cluster analysis of species composition in Ken
River basin revealed that fish assemblages of Ken
River had two distinct clusters based on the Bray-
Curtis similarity (Fig. 2). The sites along Ken River
(Gahrighat, Magradabri and Madla) had more similar
faunal assemblage and they were grouped together.
The rest of the streams that drained into Ken River had
a similar assemblage and they formed a major group in
the cluster. Further, the streams associated with Ken
River in the northeastern region of Panna landscape
such as Khaiya, Ghatera, Bargadi, Silatanala, Judinala
and Imalia had a similar assemblage and they formed
a separate cluster within the major group. At the same
time Nararan, Gehranala and Pandav Fall streams
had distinct fish assemblages which were grouped
separately.
Environmental variables vs. fish abundance
Most environmental characters measured exhibited
a high level of differences across the fifteen study sites
(Table 4). River sites (Gahrighat, Magradabri and
Madla) had more water depth and channel width than
other sites. High velocity was recorded in Gahrighat
(0.68m/sec) followed by Magrdabri (0.52m/sec). In
contrast, high percentage of canopy cover (94%) and
low water temperature (19.8 0 C) were observed in
Imalia stream. The species and site scores biplot based
on CCA of the cyprinid fish composition displayed
12.1% of weighted variance in the abundance and
49% in weighted averages and class total of species
with respect to the environmental variables. The
eigenvalues of axis 1 and 2 accounted 0.62 and 0.20
respectively. Indeed, the biplot generated by CCA
suggested that stream order, flow, depth and width
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172
3167

Fish diversity in Ken River
J.A. Johnson et al.
Table 4. Environmental variables of study sites of Ken River basin in Madhya Pradesh
Sites
Stream
order
Altitude
Mean
Depth (cm)
Stream
width (m)
velocity
(m/sec.)
Riparian
cover (%)
Temperature
(°C)
Conductivity
(µS/cm)
Gahrighat 6 269 224 46.4 0.68 32 23.6 06
Gehranala 3 327.7 42 12.2 0.02 56 24.3 46
Jamunahi 2 417.9 28 03.6 0.00 40 24.8 53
Imalia 3 395.5 46 08.3 0.16 94 19.8 07
Bargadi 3 370 32 06.4 0.03 65 24.9 64
Mahuapani 2 444.4 86 08.5 0.005 80 21.1 08
Keerpani 2 391.8 16 02.0 0.12 80 21.4 16
Ghatera 2 393.2 38 06.4 0.01 60 24.4 33
Nararan 2 294.6 22 02.5 0.05 75 22.0 07
Kheriya 4 371.6 57 20.6 0.06 82 24.6 46
Silatanala 4 250.9 40 12.6 0.02 62 24.3 52
Magradabri 6 194 116 54.6 0.52 40 23.8 07
Judinala 3 266.3 76 07.5 0.23 85 22.0 14
Madla 6 189.5 176 82.2 0.34 20 25.4 20
Pandav Falls 3 241.9 36 05.2 0.28 55 21.8 06
1
0.5
0
Axis - 2
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Axis - 1
Figure 3. Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA) biplot depicting the distribution of fish species along the
environmental parameters in 15 study sites in Panna landscape, Madhya Pradesh. [Site labels: 1- Gahrighat; 2- Gehranala;
3- Jamunahi; 4- Imalia; 5- Bargadi; 6- Mahuapani; 7- Keerpani; 8- Ghatera; 9- Nararan; 10- Kheriya; 11- Silatanala; 12-
Magradabri; 13- Judinala; 14- Madla; 15- Pandav Falls. Species codes: B.d - Bangana dero; B.b - Barilius bendelisis; C.m
- Cirrhinus mrigala; C.r - Cirrhinus reba; G.c - Gibelion catla; D.r - Danio rerio; D.a - Devario aequipinnatus; D.d - Devario
devario; E.d - Esomus danricus; G.g - Garra gotyla; G.m - Garra mullya; C.l - Crossocheilus latius; L.a - Labeo angra;
L.c - Labeo calbasu; L.p - Labeo pangusia; L.r - Labeo rohita; O.c - Osteobrama cotio; R.d - Rasbora daniconius; P.a -
Puntius amphibious; P.c - Puntius conchonius; P.sa - Puntius sarana; P.so - Puntius sophore; P.t - Puntius ticto; S.bac -
Salmophasia bacaila; S. bal -Salmophasia balookee; S.bo - Salmophasia boopis; T.t - Tor tor.
3168
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172

Fish diversity in Ken River
were the most important variables for the first axis.
Flow was a very important variable for the second
axis, although riparian cover and altitude were still
influenced (Fig. 3). The biplot of the species and site
score produced from CCA show the distribution of
species and sites in ordination space (Fig. 3). In this
plot 27 cyprinid species have been depicted to provide
insight into their composition and distribution. The
fish abundance sites such as Gahrighat, Magradabri and
Madla along Ken River (site label 1, 12 & 14 in Fig. 3)
were associated with more deeper habitat, flow, stream
order and temperature, whereas the abundance were
not influenced by altitude, conductivity and riparian
cover (Fig. 3). Further, it also explained that the species
such as Tor tor, Salmophasia boopis, Salmophasia
balookee, Salmophasia bacaila, Labeo angra and
Gibelion catla were displaced high weighted average
for flow, whereas Bangana dero, Labeo calbasu and
Puntius sarana scored a high weighted average for
width, depth and temperature. The distribution of
Danio rerio, Devario aequipinnatus, Esomus danricus
and Rasbora daniconius were influenced by altitude,
riparian cover and conductivity.
Discussion
Ken River in Panna landscape has a diverse
fish fauna of high conservation importance. When
compared to other sub-basins of the Yamuna River
basin, Ken River has lesser species richness than that
of Champal basin and Betwa, where 71 and 60 species
of fishes were reported respectively, but the fish
assemblages were similar to that of these neighbouring
basins (Dubey & Verma 1959; Vyas et al. 2012). In this
study, cyprinids dominate the assemblage structure in
Panna landscape as they occupy all possible habitats
due to their high adaptive variability (Johnson &
Arunachalam 2009). Three of the cyprinids species
such as Devario aequipinnatus, Esomus danricus and
Garra mullya were widely distributed in most of the
study sites and they also have widespread distribution
in India (Talwar & Jhingran 1991; Jayaram 1999) and
they are a common and abundant species in Indian
waters. Such extensive distribution and their common
high abundance suggest that most of these species are
capable of tolerating a wide range of environmental
conditions (Pusey et al. 1993). However, in the
J.A. Johnson et al.
present study a comparatively low percentage of
cyprinid population was recorded in Nararan Stream.
This is mainly due to the introduction of Channa
gachua and C. punctatus in the temple tank, which
in turn contribute to the assemblages structure of this
stream. A noteworthy observation is the occurrence
of Salmophasia boopis, Nemacheilus denisoni and
Rita gogra (known so far from the rivers of peninsular
India) in Vindhyan ranges (Yamuna River basin) and
this is interesting in the context of Ichthyogeography.
The Salmophasia boopis was reported from streams/
rivers originating from the Western Ghats of Tamil
Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka and Maharashtra (Dahanukar
2011a). Similarly, Nemacheilus denisoni is also widely
distributed in the Western Ghats rivers (Menon 1987).
On the other hand, Rita gogra was reported from
Krishna, Godavari and Narmada river basin of Deccan
regions and distributed in Maharashtra, Karnataka,
Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh
states (Dahanukar 2011b). These distribution records
of peninsular forms in Vindhyan Ranges recollect the
possibility of prehistoric river valley modifications
as proposed by Hora (1950). However, number
of species per family recorded in Ken River basin
revealed that more number of species were recorded
belonging to the cyprinid family as compared to other
families, which clarify that speciation occurred in this
landscape in recent times.
Another interesting finding is the occurrence of a
viable population of the Mahseer Tor tor in Ken River
of Panna landscape. In the present study this species
was recorded from Gahrighat, Magradabri and Madla
along the Ken River and Pandav Fall stream. It is a
mighty game fish, which has provided a worthwhile
source of sport for international anglers. It reaches up
to 78kg or more and there is a record of anglers having
captured a 45kg fish (Menon 1999; Rayamajhi et al.
2010). Twenty years ago, they figured prominently
in commercial catches in certain stretches of the
Narmada and Tapti rivers, but the landings are reported
to have declined remarkably in recent years (Talwar
& Jhingran 1991). Presently, size ranges from 1.5–2
kg have been reported from its native ranges and
this species distribution is restricted only in certain
pockets of Protected Areas in Narmada, Tapti, Betwa
and Chambal rivers in Central India. The reduction
in population is mainly due to degradation of feeding
and breeding habitat due to construction of barrages
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172
3169

Fish diversity in Ken River
and dams that in turn affect the breeding migration of
this species towards upstream and finally that leads to
patchy and fragmented populations in different rivers.
This patchy distribution and selective harvesting of
this big sized barb have also led to the disappearance
of this species from its native ranges. However, in the
present study we noted different life history stages of
Tor tor in Gahrighat region of Ken River indicating
that this species breeds upstream in the main Ken
River, which provides some promise for survival of
this species. However, further study on habitat use,
spawning site selection and life history traits of this
species in Ken River is warranted.
The present study also revealed that the main
Ken River had high diversity of fish compared to its
associated streams, which shows that the diverse habitat
conditions such as rocky and deep pools, velocity, etc.
in Ken River support great variety of fauna (Kaemingk
et al. 2007). Moreover, it is a well established fact
that there is occurrence of higher species richness
at the confluence of tributary streams with the main
river than in the tributary streams (Falke & Gido
2006). Further, the low diversity of fish documented
in streams associated with Ken River is mainly due to
the drying of streams during summer.
In addition to that, a variety of factors like water
quality, habitat availability, flow variability and nutrient
supplies from riparian habitats control the abundance
and distribution of stream fishes. Such environmental
variables are easier to predict than other biotic variables
like predation and competition. Earlier, single water
quality parameter was used to correlate with fish
abundance (Echelle et al. 1972; Matthews 1987).
Hawkes et al. (1986) hypothesised that the combination
of different water quality parameters is likely to operate
“in concert with each other as a multivariate system
and not as isolated unvariate variables”. In this study,
the combinations of eight environmental variables
were used to correlate with cyprinid abundance
among the study streams. The CCA analysis revealed
that the environmental variables such as water depth,
flow, water temperature and stream order substantially
influence fish assemblage structuring in the Ken
River basin. These variables have previously been
considered important factors in structuring fish
assemblage (Matthews 1998; Angermeier & Winston
1999; Marchetti & Moyle 2001; May & Brown 2002).
In harsh and variable environments such as streams and
J.A. Johnson et al.
rivers, abiotic factors are likely to play an important
role in determining fish assemblage structure.
References
Anderson, T.W. (2001). Predator responses, prey refuges, and
density-dependent mortality of a marine fish. Ecology 82:
245–257.
Angermeier, P.L. & M.R. Winston (1999). Characterizing fish
community diversity across Virginia landscapes: prerequisite
fish community diversity for conservation. Ecological
Application 9: 335–349.
Arunachalam, M. (2000). Assemblage structure of stream
fishes in the Western Ghats. Hydrobiologia 430: 1–31.
Bhat, A. (2003). Diversity and composition of freshwater
fishes in the river systems of Central Western Ghats, India.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 68: 25–38.
Bhat, A. (2004). Patterns and distribution of freshwater fishes in
rivers of Central Western Ghats, India and their association
with environmental gradients. Hydrobiologia 529: 83–97.
Bishop, K.A. & M.A. Forber (1991). The freshwater fishes
of northern Australia, pp. 79–108. In: Haynes, C.D., M.G.
Ridpath & M.C. Williams (eds.). Monsoonal Australia:
Landscape, Ecology and Men in the Northern Lowlands.
A.A. Balkema Publishers, Netherlands.
Capone, T.A. & J.A. Kushlan (1991). Fish community
structure in dry season stream pools. Ecology 72: 983–992.
Dahanukar, N. (2011a). Salmophasia boopis. In: IUCN 2011.
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2.
. Downloaded on 17 June 2012.
Dahanukar, N. (2011b). Rita gogra. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2 . Downloaded on 17 June 2012.
Dubey, G.P. & M.N. Verma (1959). Fish and fisheries of
Chambal river. Proceedings of All India Congress Zoology
2: 647–665.
Echelle, A.A., Echelle, A.F. & L.G. Hill (1972). Interspecific
interactions and limiting factors of abundance and
distribution in the Red River pup - fish, Cyprinoden
rubrofluviatilis. American Midland Naturalist 88: 109–
130.
Eschmeyer, W.N. & R. Fricke (2011). Catalog of Fishes
electronic version (10 February 2011). California Academy
of Science. . Accessed on 12 September 2011.
Falke, J.A. & K.B. Gido (2006). Effects of reservoir
connectivity on stream fish assemblages in the Great Plains.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 63:
480–493.
Ganasan, V. & R.M. Hughes (1998). Application of an index
of biologicalintegrity (IBI) to fish assemblages of the rivers
Khan and Kshipra (Madhya Pradesh), India. Freshwater
Biology 40: 367–383.
Garg, R.K., R.J. Rao & D.N. Saksena (2007). Checklist of
fishes of Ramsagar Reservoir, Datia District, Madhya
3170
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172

Fish diversity in Ken River
Pradesh, India. Zoo’s Print Journal 22(8): 2801–2803.
Gorman, O.T. & J.R. Karr (1978). Habitat structure and
stream fish community. Ecology 59: 507–515.
Grenouillet, G., D. Pont & C. Herisse (2004). Within-basin
fish assemblage structure: the relative influence of habitat
versus stream spatial position on local species richness.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 61:
93–103.
Hawkes, C.L., D.L. Miller & W.G. Layher (1986). Fish
ecoregions of Kansas: stream fish assemblage patterns and
associated with environmental correlates. Environmental
Biology Fishes 17: 267–279.
Hora, S.L. (1950). Hora’s Satpura Hypothesis - an aspect of
Indian Biogeograpy. Current Science 19: 364–370.
Jain, S.K., P.K. Agarwal & V.P. Singh (2007). Hydrology and
Water Resources of India - Volume 57 of Water Science and
Technology Library - Tributaries of Yamuna River. Springer
Publication, Netherlands, 354pp.
Jayapal, R., Q. Qureshi & R. Chellam (2007). Developing a
spatial conservation protocol for Central Indian Highlands
through a biogeographical analysis of birds and existing
Protected Area network: a Geographical Information
Systems approach. Research Report No. R.R.07/001,
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 200pp.
Jayaram, K.C. (1999). The Fresh Water Fishes of Indian
Region. Narendra Publication, New Delhi, India, 551pp.
Johnson, J.A. (1999). Diversity and ecological structure of
fishes in selected streams/rivers in Western Ghats. PhD
Thesis, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli.
Johnson, J.A. & M. Arunachalam (2009). Diversity,
distribution and assemblage structure of fishes in streams
of southern Western Ghats, India. Journal of Threatened
Taxa 1(10): 507–513.
Kaemingk, M.A., B.D.S. Graeb, C.W. Hoagstrom & D.W.
Willis (2007). Patterns of fish diversity in a mainstem
missouri river reservoir and associated delta in South Dakota
and Nebraska, USA. River Research and Applications 23:
786–791.
Karanth, K.U., R.S. Chundawat, J.D. Nichols & S.N. Kumar
(2004). Estimation of tiger densities in the tropical dry
forests of Panna, Central India, using photographic capturerecapture
sampling. Animal Conservation 7: 285–290.
Kottelat, M. & T. Whitten (1997). Freshwater biodiversity
in Asia with special reference to fishes. The world bank
Technical Report No. 343, Washington, DC.
Lakra, W.S., U.K. Sarkar, R.S. Kumar, A. Pandey, V.K.
Dubey & O.P. Gusain (2010). Fish diversity, habitat
ecology and their conservation and management issues of a
tropical River in Ganga basin, India. Environmentalist 30:
306–319.
Marchetti, M.P. & P.B. Moyle (2001). Effects of flow regime on
fish assemblages in a regulated California stream. Ecological
Application 11(2): 530–539.
Matthews, W.J. (1987). Physicochemical tolerance and
selectivity of stream fishes as related to their geographic
ranges and local distributions, pp. 111–120. In: Matthews,
J.A. Johnson et al.
W.J. & D.C. Heins (eds.). Community and Evolutionary
Ecology of North American Stream Fishes. University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Matthews, W.J. (1998). Patterns in Freshwater Fish Ecology.
Chapman and Hall, London, 756pp.
May, J.T. & L.R. Brown (2002). Fish communities of the
Sacramento river basin: implications for conservation of native
fishes in the Central Valley, California. Environmental
Biology of Fishes 63: 373–388.
Menon, A. G. K. (1987). The fauna of India and the adjacent
countries. Pisces. Vol. IV. Teleostei - Cobitoidea. Part 1.
Homalopteridae. Zoological Survey of India. The fauna
of India and the adjacent countries. Pisces. Vol. IV: i-x+
1-259+pls. 1–16.
Menon, A.G.K. (1999). Check list - Freshwater Fishes of
India. Records of Zoological Survey of India, Occasional
paper No. 175, 366pp.
Minns, C.K. (1989). Factors affecting fish species richness in
Ontario Lakes. American Fisheries Society 118: 533–545.
Muchilisin, Z.A. &. M.N.S. Azizah (2009). Diversity and
distribution of freshwater fishes in Aceh water, Nothern-
Sumatra, Indonesia. International Journal of Zoological
Research 5(2): 62–79.
Padhye, A.D., N. Dahanukar, M. Panigankar, M. Deshpande
& D. Deshpande (2006). Seasonal and landscape wise
distribution of butterflies in Tamhini, northern Western
Ghats, India. Zoos’ Print Journal 21(3): 2175–2181.
Pusey, B.J., A.H. Arthington & M.G. Read (1993). Spatial
and temporal variation in fish assemblage structure in the
Mary River, south-eastern Queensland: the influence of
habitat structure. Environmental Biology of Fishes 37:
355–380.
Rayamajhi, A., B.R. Jha & C. Sharma (2010). Tor tor.
In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Version 2011.2. . Downloaded on
18 April 2012.
Rodgers, W.A., H.S. Panwar & V.B. Mathur (2002). Wildlife
Protected Area Network in India: A Review. Wildlife
Institute of India publication, Dehradun, India, 44pp.
Schlosser, I.J. (1982). Fish community structure and function
along two habitat gradients in headwater stream. Ecological
Monograph 52: 395–414.
Schlosser, I.J. (1985). Flow regine, juvenile abundance and
the assemblage structure of stream fishes. Ecology 66:
1484–1490.
Shahnawaz, A., M. Venkateshwaru, D.S. Somashekar &
K. Santosh (2010). Fish diversity with relation to
water quality of Bhadra River of Western Ghats (India).
Environmental monitoring and Assessment 161: 83–91.
Sreekantha, M.D., S. Chandran, D.K. Mesta, G.R. Rao, K.V.
Gururaja & T.V. Ramachandra (2007). Fish diversity
in relation to landscape and vegetation in central Western
Ghats, India. Current Science 92(11): 1592–1603.
Talwar, P.K. & A.G. Jhingran (1991). Inland Fishes of India
and Adjacent Countries. Oxford IBH Publication, New
Delhi, Vol. 1 & 2, 1158pp.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172
3171

Fish diversity in Ken River
Taylor, P.D., L. Fahrig, K. Henein & G. Merriam (1993). Connectivity is a vital
element of landscape structure. Oikos 68: 571–573.
ter Braak, C.J.F. (1986). Canonical correspondence analysis: A new eigenvector
method for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67: 1167–1179.
ter Braak, C.J.E. & P.E.M. Verdonschot (1995). Canonical correspondence
analysis and related multivariate methods in aquatic ecology. Aquatic Sciences
57(3): 1015–1621.
Vyas, V., D. Damde & V. Parashar (2012). Fish biodiversity of Betwa River in
Madhya Pradesh, India with special reference to a sacred ghat. International
Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation 4(2): 71–77.
Williams, L.R., C.M. Taylor, M.L. Warren Jr. & J.A. Clingenpeel (2003).
Environmental variability, historical contingency, and the structure of regional
fish and macroinvertebrate faunas in Ouachita, mountain stream systems.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 67(2): 203–216.
J.A. Johnson et al.
Author Details: J.A. Jo h n s o n is a Scientist
at Wildlife Institute of India, currently working
on ecology and biology of freshwater fishes
of India. R. Pa r m a r is a researcher at Wildlife
Institute of India, work on ecology of large
carnivores. K. Ra m e s h is a Scientist at Wildlife
Institute of India, currently working on landscape
ecology and ecological modelling. S. Se n is a
Scientist at Wildlife Institute of India, work on
conservation of Biodiversity of central India. R.
Sr e e n i v a s a Mu r t h y is the Field Director of Panna
National Park, currently engaged in managing
re-established tiger population in Panna Tiger
Reserve.
Author Contribution: The first author involved
in conceptualization, field sampling, data
analysis and manuscript writing. The co-authors
assisted in field sampling, data analysis and
also data interpretation.
3172
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3161–3172

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(13): 3173–3182
Western Ghats
Special Series
Local ecological knowledge of the threatened Cochin
Forest Cane Turtle Vijayachelys silvatica and Travancore Tortoise
Indotestudo travancorica from the Anamalai Hills of the Western
Ghats, India
Arun Kanagavel 1,2,3 & Rajeev Raghavan 1,3,4
1
Conservation Research Group (CRG), St. Albert’s College, Kochi, Kerala 682018, India
2
Wildlife Information Liaison Development Society (WILD), 4 Zoo Outreach Organization (ZOO),
96 Kumudham Nagar, Vilankurichi Road, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641035, India
3
Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE), School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury,
CT2 7NR, United Kingdom
Email: 1 arun.kanagavel@gmail.com (corresponding author), 4 rajeevraq@hotmail.com
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: S. Bhupathy
Manuscript details:
Ms # o3003
Received 14 November 2011
Final received 28 August 2012
Finally accepted 06 October 2012
Citation: Kanagavel, A. & R. Raghavan (2012).
Local ecological knowledge of the threatened
Cochin Forest Cane Turtle Vijayachelys silvatica
and Travancore Tortoise Indotestudo travancorica
from the Anamalai Hills of the Western Ghats,
India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(13): 3173–
3182.
Copyright: © Arun Kanagavel & Rajeev
Raghavan 2012. Creative Commons Attribution
3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted
use of this article in any medium for non-profit
purposes, reproduction and distribution by
providing adequate credit to the authors and the
source of publication.
For Author Details, Author Contribution and
Acknowledgements see end of this article.
ZOO OUTREACH ORGANIZATION
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:A44F15BE-
E829-4D6B-A64C-6CB03D9CDD26
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
Abstract: In this study, we used local ecological knowledge to determine the status,
habitats, threats and consumption of two range-restricted and threatened chelonians,
Vijayachelys silvatica and Indotestudo travancorica from two forest divisions of Kerala,
that occur in the Western Ghats. Of these terrestrial species, I. travancorica was more
abundant, preferred and consumed in the study region. Fire was the major perceived
threat to these species, followed by human consumption. Contrary to the literature,
V. silvatica was considered common and encountered more often during the fruiting
season of specific plants, and in areas where temperatures were low. We also found
that photographs, rather than local names, were important for species identification
associated with such knowledge surveys.
Keywords: Chalakudy, Indotestudo travancorica, Kadar, Malayar, Vazhachal,
Vijayachelys silvatica
Introduction
Chelonians comprise one of the world’s most endangered vertebrate
groups and are next only to primates in terms of the impending risk of
extinction (Hoffmann et al. 2010). Turtle populations are incessantly
declining due to their use on a massive anthropological scale as food,
traditional medicines and pets; seldom accounting for their sustainability
(Turtle Conservation Coalition 2011). In India, which is among the
top five priority countries in Asia for chelonian conservation (Stuart &
Thorjarnarson 2003), commercially driven collection and consumption
of turtles is extensive around the central and northeastern states.
Noncommercial use and small-scale trade is widespread and includes
among others, the local use of turtle shell and blood for curing body ailments
(Bhupathy & Choudhury 1995; Gupta 2000; Deepak & Vasudevan 2009;
Pasha et al. 2009). These issues are however largely understudied and
The publication of this article is supported by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF)
-- a joint initiative of l’Agence Française de Développement, Conservation International, the
Global Environment Facility, the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and the
World Bank.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182 3173

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
neglected (Pasha et al. 2009).
Of the 28 species of tortoise and freshwater
(including terrestrial) turtles known from India,
40% are threatened (Das 1991; CFH/MCBT 2006).
Detailed ecological information on numerous species,
including common and widely distributed forms such
as Lissemys punctata (Bhupathy & Vijayan 1993,
1994) and Melanochelys trijuga (Bhupathy 2009; Das
& Bhupathy 2009; Krishnakumar et al. 2009) and
range-restricted species such as Vijayachelys silvatica
and Indotestudo travancoria is scanty (see Deepak et
al. 2011). Quantitative studies on the impact of various
kinds of threats to chelonians are also lacking.
Information on the ecology and use of V. silvatica
and I. travancoria has been previously gathered
around the forests of Chalakudy in Kerala from
the Kadars, an indigenous seminomadic huntergatherer
community (Vijaya 1982a; Vijaya 1984;
Appukuttan 1991) with a population of 1500, living
in 24 settlements across the landscape (Bachan et al.
2011). The Malayars, another indigenous community
who are fewer in number than the Kadars in the same
landscape, are more inclined to agriculture as a source
of livelihood. Both these indigenous communities
currently lead a more urbanised lifestyle from reduced
interaction with forests (Bachan et al. 2011). A large
nonindigenous population also exists in the vicinity of
these forested areas. The main source of income for
local communities in this region is through both fulltime
or part-time employment in plantations, the State
Forest Department and tourism activities around the
Athirapilly Waterfalls.
The presence of such local communities provides
an opportunity to understand various biodiversity
issues through local ecological knowledge (LEK)
which is especially vital in case of cryptic species that
are difficult to detect. The information gathered during
an individual’s lifetime from personal observations
and experiences has facilitated informing the ecology,
distribution and threats to numerous species (Gilchrist
et al. 2005; Ravaloharimanitra et al. 2011; Lescureux
et al. 2011). We used LEK of these indigenous and
nonindigenous communities in the Anamalai Hills
of the Western Ghats to document local names,
perceived abundance, consumption and threats to the
endemic forest-dwelling chelonians of the region, the
Endangered Cochin Forest Cane Turtle V. silvatica
(Asian Turtle Trade Working Group 2000a; Image 1)
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
© Arun Kanagavel
Image 1. Cochin Forest Cane Turtle Vijayachelys silvatica
at Chalakudy Forest Division
© Arun Kanagavel
Image 2. Travancore Tortoise Indotestudo travancorica at
Vazhachal Forest Division
and Vulnerable Travancore Tortoise I. travancorica
(Asian Turtle Trade Working Group 2000b; Image 2).
Since V. silvatica, was perceived to be lesser known,
rarer/more difficult to detect and the most threatened
of the forest-dwelling chelonians in the region, we
also attempted to gather any additional information,
especially on their ecology, status and occurrence that
would inform future surveys.
Study Area
We surveyed five forest ranges, namely,
Athirapilly, Sholayar, Vazhachal, Kollathirumedu and
Vellikulungara of the Vazhachal (10 0 07’–10 0 23’N &
76 0 09’– 76 0 54’E) and Chalakudy (10 0 10’–10 0 28’N
& 76 0 05’–76 0 37’E) forest divisions in the Anamalai
Hills of the southern Western Ghats (Fig. 1). Much
of the research on V. silvatica has been conducted in
these forest divisions (Vijaya 1982a; Moll et al. 1986;
3174
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
Figure 1. Map of the study area and the surveyed human settlements and forest ranges (see Appendix 1) in the Western
Ghats
Appukuttan 1991).
These forest divisions are also located adjacent to
the Parambikulam Tiger Reserve and the Chimmony
Wildlife Sanctuary and come under the drainage
system of two rivers, Chalakudy (and its tributaries
including Sholayar and Karappara) and Karuvannur
(Mupilli Tributary). The area receives an average
rainfall of 4019mm and sustains moist evergreen, semievergreen
and deciduous vegetation in addition to Teak
Tectona grandis and Bamboo Ochlandra travancorica
plantations managed by the forest department (James
et al. 2011). The State Highway 21 (connecting
Chalakudy Town with the state border) as well as
restricted-access motorable pathways and footpaths
occur here. Two hydroelectric dams, Poringalkuthu
and Sholayar already exist in this landscape, while the
construction of a dam in the Athirapally-Vazhachal
area is currently uncertain due to resistance from
environmental activists (Nair 2011).
Methods
Unnamed colour photographs of three species—I.
travancorica, V. silvatica and Lissemys punctata (Indian
Flap-shelled Turtle)—represented as a complete side
profile with an inset of a distinct characteristic were
shown one after another to respondents, who were
first requested to identify them individually. Lissemys
punctata being a lesser-concern species (Asian Turtle
Trade Working Group 2000c) was included in the
survey to derive comparisons with the two threatened
species. The Indian Black Turtle Melanochelys
trijuga, that might be common here was not included
in the present study due to its morphological similarity
with V. silvatica, so as to reduce any sampling errors
(Anadón et al. 2009). Local names used for the species
while identifying them was noted and respondents were
asked to rank the abundance of the three species. After
determining whether respondents consumed chelonian
meat, they were asked to rank the three species based
on preference and extent of consumption. Respondents
were also asked if deforestation, forest-fires, roads or
any other factor threatened wild populations of the
forest-dwelling species. Age, gender and ethnicity of
each respondent was also sought.
Questionnaires were administered at villages
selected through a convenience sampling strategy
(Newing 2010) for gathering information pertaining to
LEK from December 2010 to March 2011 with the help
of local informants. The survey was conducted in the
local language (Malayalam) and from each household,
a single individual above the age of 18 years was
selected after he/she consented to be interviewed. With
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182
3175

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
specific regard to V. silvatica, open-ended questions
were used to determine their local sites of occurrence
as well as the environmental conditions and seasons
in which they had been sighted. Respondents were
asked whether this species was rare or common in the
wild (including a “Don’t Know” option) and whether
its population was reducing (including “Maybe” and
“Don’t Know” options).
Analysis
Results were analysed using SPSS 11.5 for
Windows. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-test
(Zar 2010) were used to determine whether there were
differences in perceived species abundance across
different forest ranges. These tests were also used
to check for differences in chelonian consumption
across forest ranges, settlements and socio-economic
characteristics (age, gender and ethnicity) of
respondents.
Results
A total of 72 questionnaires were administered at
eight local settlements (Appendix 1). The majority of
the sample were Kadars (n = 44), followed by Malayars
(n = 17) and only 11 nonindigenous local inhabitants.
Most of the respondents were male (n = 60) and over
40 years old (n = 57). All the respondents confirmed
the occurrence of I. travancorica and V. silvatica while
six out of 72 respondents had not seen L. punctata in
the landscape.
While respondents identified V. silvatica and
L. punctata, with single, distinct local names, I.
travancorica was associated with four local names
including one that was also used for V. silvatica (Table
1). The chelonian that was perceived to be most
abundant in the area was I. travancorica followed by
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
V. silvatica and L. punctata (Fig. 2). The perceived
abundance of these species did not vary among forest
ranges.
Indotestudo travancorica was the most commonly
consumed species followed by V. silvatica and L.
punctata (Fig. 4). There was no significant difference
between the species preferred for consumption and
those that were most consumed. There was also
no significant difference in chelonian consumption
across the different forest ranges, settlements or social
attributes of respondents. Forest fires and predation
by a range of wild animals including the Asiatic Wild
Dog Cuon alpinus, Leopard Panthera pardus, Wild
Boar Sus scrofa and Tiger Panthera tigris were thought
to be the major threats to forest-dwelling chelonians
(Fig. 3). Consumption of chelonians was widespread
(87.5%) among the respondents and almost on par with
the perception of fire as a threat (Fig. 3). Chelonian
mortality, especially in I. travancorica due to trampling
by the Asian Elephant Elephas maximus was also
Mean Ranking
3
2
1
0
Abundance
(3 = most abundant/consumed, 1 = least abundant/consumed)
Figure 2. Overall mean ranking of abundance and
consumption of the three chelonian species as per
respondent ranking
Travancore Tortoise
Cane Turtle
Flapshell Turtle
Consumption
Table 1. Local (Malayalam) names used in the study area for three chelonian species
Forest Range Indotestudo travancorica Vijayachelys silvatica Lissemys punctata
Athirapilly Chooral aama Chooral aama Vellam aama
Sholayar Kaar aama, Saadha aama Chooral aama Vellam aama
Vazhachal Kaar aama, Saadha aama, Vella aama Chooral aama Vellam aama
Kollathirumedu Kaar aama Chooral aama Vellam aama
Vellikulungara Saadha aama Chooral aama Vellam aama
3176
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
Percentage of Respondents (n=72)
100
80
60
40
20
0
Deforestation
Fire
Road Human
consumption
Threats
Predation
by other
species
Elephant
trampling
Figure 3. Threats faced by Indotestudo travancorica and
Vijayachelys silvatica in the study area
Percentage of Respondents (n=72)
100
80
60
40
20
0
Low
temperature
area
Water
source
Leaf
litter
Microhabitat
Chooral &
Eatta
Grass
&Herb
Figure 4a. Typical microhabitats associated by
respondents to Vijayachelys silvatica in the study area
Large
tree
100
Percentage of Respondents (n=72)
80
60
40
20
© Kerala Forest Department
Image 3. An Indotestudo travancorica perceived to be dead
from trampling by an elephant at Athirapilly Forest Division
0
Fruiting Monsoon Summer
Seasons
Figure 4b. Seasons associated by respondents to sightings
of Vijayachelys silvatica in the study area
reported (Image 3). Chelonians and elephants were
believed to encounter one another regularly as they
frequented the same water sources and habitats, which
led to the trampling. It was perceived that causalities
would not occur if chelonians were on relatively
soft substrata. Otherwise it resulted in their instant
death, or depending on the extent of how cracked the
carapace was, it either fused back or the individual
expired later.
A majority of respondents associated the presence
of cane turtles to areas where the temperature was low,
close to water sources, under leaf litter and close to
“chooral” (Calamus rheedi) and “eatta” (Ochlandra
travancorica) (Fig. 4a) especially during the rainy
season and fruiting of “mootal thuri” (Baccaurea
courtallensis) and “punna” (Dillenia pentagyna)
(Fig. 4b). Sightings of V. silvatica were perceived by
13.9% of the respondents (n = 10) to have increased in
frequency during lightning, which caused the turtles
to move out into the open. There was some overlap in
the sites listed, in spite of the respondents belonging to
different settlements, communities and forest ranges
(Appendix 1). Contrary to existing information, V.
silvatica was considered to be common by 79.2% of
the respondents (n = 57) and rare by the rest. A majority
of the respondents (61.1%, n=44) believed that the
population was not declining, 8.35% believed they
were declining, 22.2% believed that the populations
may be declining while 8.35% did not know of any
change in population.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182
3177

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
Discussion
The type specimen of V. silvatica was obtained from
the Kadars, and their LEK facilitated the rediscovery
of the turtle providing basic ecological information
(Moll et al. 1986). However, a recent study states that
this community has “little knowledge” of the species
(Vasudevan et al. 2010). Our study strongly suggests
otherwise, and is largely in conjunction with the ecology
of the species assimilated through field-based surveys
and local perceptions (Vijaya 1982a; Moll et al. 1986;
Whitaker & Vijaya 2009). In addition, it provides a list
of possible sites of occurrence (Appendix I) that could
inform future surveys. Local ecological knowledge
reports the occurrence of turtles under leaf litter,
which has been reported by field studies (Moll et al.
1986; Appukuttan 1991; Deepak & Vasudevan 2009).
They were also reported to be encountered more often
during the rainy season than in the dry season, which
could be from an increased activity during the rains
(Deepak & Vasudevan 2009). However, in contrast to
other studies, which suggest nonaffinity, locals related
V. silvatica with water sources (Groombridge et al.
1984; Moll et al. 1986; Deepak & Vasudevan 2009).
Local ecological knowledge, like that from the past,
continued to relate the turtles with cane (Calamus sp.).
Although some field studies have found the turtles in
the vicinity of these canes (Vijaya 1982b; Appukuttan
1991; Jose et al. 2007) others have not (Groombridge
et al. 1984; Moll et al. 1986). Also similar is their
occurrence close to reed bamboo C. rheedi (Vijaya
1982a; Vasudevan et al. 2010). Our study like others
also related V. silvatica to herbaceous plants but not
fallen logs or rocky terrain (Vijaya 1982b; Moll et
al. 1986; Vasudevan et al. 2010). Previous studies
also suggested a larger abundance of the species in
evergreen and semievergreen forests (Vijaya 1984;
Vasudevan et al. 2010), which is probably what the
LEK regarding lower temperatures and large trees
implied.
Our results suggesting a higher perceived
abundance of I. travancorica compared to V. silvatica
in the study area is similar to the perceptions of the
same indigenous community three decades ago (Vijaya
1982b) and another field-based study two decades ago
(Appukuttan 1991). However, other studies contradict
this, suggesting otherwise (Groombridge et al. 1984;
Deepak & Vasudevan 2009; Vasudevan et al. 2010).
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
This difference could have resulted from V. silvatica
being more abundant than I. travancorica due to
habitat differences, differences in survey techniques,
the effect of forest fires, from the higher consumption
of I. travancorica and/or local taboos.
Forest fires which was perceived as a threat by a
majority (97.2%, n=70) of our respondents and by
past studies (Appukuttan 1991; Vasudevan et al. 2010)
does not always cause fatality among chelonians.
Individuals have been known to survive fires with
some degree of external injury (Ramesh 2004).
Moreover, incidents of forest fires have reduced in this
area during recent years (Bachan et al. 2011).
Consumption by local communities was the second
most critical threat to the forest-dwelling chelonians.
While consumption of V. silvatica by the Kadars
has been reported earlier (Vijaya 1982b), reports for
I. travancorica consumption exist throughout their
distribution across different indigenous communities
(Groombridge et al. 1984; Appukuttan 1991;
Bhupathy & Choudhury 1995; Vasudevan et al. 2010).
These studies, however, did not assess the extent of
consumption suggesting that it occurred only among
forest-dwelling indigenous communities. Our study
revealed that chelonian consumption is prevalent
and not restricted to indigenous communities alone.
Indotestudo travancorica, the most consumed
chelonian among the respondents was also the most
abundant. Consumption may therefore be influenced
by abundance and most likely by their relative ease of
detection as I. travancorica may be more susceptible
to capture due to its larger size (Appukuttan 1991).
Questionnaire surveys in adjoining forest areas
(Indira Gandhi National Park and Parambikulam
Wildlife Sanctuary & Tiger Reserve) suggested that
approximately one-fourth of the sample population
living inside these protected areas consumed I.
travancorica, but not V. silvatica (Vasudevan et al.
2010). Kadars also reside in these adjoining areas
(Bachan et al. 2011) and this population along with
those in our study area are related and therefore visit
one another. The prominent difference in consumption
intensities could have resulted from a respondent
bias, small sample size interviewed or from a weaker
enforcement in our study area, which is a utilitarianbased
Reserve Forest, while those examined by
Vasudevan et al. (2010) were strict preservationistbased
National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary (IUCN
3178
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
Categories, II and IV).
The third most critical threat perceived was
consumption by large carnivores and wild boars,
which has been reported earlier (Vijaya 1988; Deepak
& Vasudevan 2009). Chelonians being stamped by
elephants has been previously reported in the Indira
Gandhi Wildlife Sanctuary, wherein an I. travancorica
had survived the injuries it had so sustained (Ramesh
2004).
Local perceptions focussed on localised threats
rather than the landscape level, as in the present study,
the respondents did not perceive deforestation and
roads as serious threats. Moreover, no respondent
mentioned dams and hydroelectric projects as a
possible threat; maybe because they relate it to a
general ‘loss of forest’.
Conclusion
Information derived from LEK has rarely been used
in species assessments as a result of being perceived as
an unreliable source for informing scientifically robust
conservation action (Meijaard et al. 2011). This is but
analogous in the case of field-based techniques, that
are time-consuming and expensive (Anadón et al.
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
2009) especially for species that are difficult to detect.
One would then need to depend, or integrate LEK with
field surveys to adequately inform species assessments
like that has been done for I. travancorica previously
(Bhupathy & Choudhury 1995; Ramesh 2008). One
aspect where inaccuracies could crop up in LEK
surveys is the use of local names for species. Certain
species hold multiple local names that are used for
multiple species (Pillay et al. 2011) like the case of I.
travancorica in the present study wherein respondents
categorized two chelonian species associated within a
specific habitat as the same. We therefore suggest that
interviews be always conducted after confirming species
identity through photographs, and the secondary use
thereof of local names to increase the accuracy of LEK
surveys. Fire and human consumption (primarily I.
travancorica) are the two major threats in accordance
to LEK that need to be mitigated to support chelonian
conservation in this landscape.
References
Anadón, J.D., A. Giménez, R. Ballestar & I. Pérez (2009).
Evaluation of local ecological knowledge as a method
for collecting extensive data on animal abundance.
Conservation Biology 23: 617–625.
Appendix 1. Local sites where Vijayachelys silvatica were perceived to occur with reference to human settlement, forest
range, community type and number of respondents interviewed
No Settlement Forest Range Community Type
Number of
respondents
Local sites of occurrence
1 Athirapilly * Athirapilly (a)
Malayar
Nonindigenous/
Immigrants
3
10
Below the waterfalls; opposite side of the river at the
waterfalls; Chathanpaara; Chaarpa; Ezhattumugham;
Kannankuzhi; Karadipaara; Karanthodu; Kodakullam;
Manjanam Kuthu; Munipaara; Ulasseri; Vadapaara
2 Thavalakuzhipaara Sholaiyar (b) Malayar 8
3 Pokayilapaara Vazhachal (c) Kadar 8
4 Poringalkuthu Vazhachal Kadar 11
Adavara; Churaivalichapaara; Kummatti; Mechapuly;
Thoduthoi, Thottipetti; Thumbikaipaara
Ammani Pocket; Edinjapaalam; Karanthodu; Pachila
Valam; Paradi; Valiyapaara
Gundurmedu; Karimala Gopuram; Kumlekody; Paradi;
Thendankuzhy; Thottapaara; Valiyapaara Thodu
5 Siddhan Pocket Vazhachal Kadar 4 Ambalapaara; Karanthodu; Mukkampuzha
6 Vazhachal Vazhachal
7 Watchmaram Kollathirumedu (d)
Kadar 11 Near Iron-bridge; Power House; Chaarpa;
Nonindigenous/
Gundurmedu; Karanthodu; Lakshmi; Pachalakadu
Immigrants 1
Panjanamkuthu; Valiyapaara
Kadar 5 Adavara,; Kalakallu; Kumatti mala; Sholayar Dam Side;
Valichapaara; Veettikunnu Vakam; Veeramudi Mala;
Malayar 6 Vachumaram Kuthu
8 Aanappandham # Vellikulungara (e) Kadar 5 Kavalai; Komalapaara; Nadukani; Thativara
* The results from this settlement need to be used with caution since respondents described both Vijayachelys silvatica and Indotestudo travancorica
with the same local name
#
Within the Chalakudy Forest Division, while all the others settlements are in the Vazhachal Forest Division
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182
3179

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
Appukuttan, K.S. (1991). Cane Turtle and Travancore Turtle
- a survey report. KFRI, Peechi, India, 21pp.
Asian Turtle Trade Working Group (2000a). Vijayachelys
silvatica. In: IUCN 2011. 2011 IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species. Downloaded
on 29 August 2011.
Asian Turtle Trade Working Group (2000b). Indotestudo
travancorica. In: IUCN 2011. 2011 IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species. Downloaded
on 29 August 2011.
Asian Turtle Trade Working Group (2000c). Lissemys
punctata. In: IUCN 2011. 2011 IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species. Downloaded
on 09 August 2011.
Bachan, A.K.H., R. Kannan, S. Muraleedharan & S.
Kumar (2011). Participatory conservation and monitoring
of Great Hornbills and Malabar Pied Hornbills with the
involvement of endemic kadar tribe in the Anamalai hills
of southern western ghats, India. The Raffles Bulletin of
Zoology 24: 37-43.
Bhupathy, S. (2009). Status, distribution and ecology of the
Indian Flapshell Turtle Lissemys punctata. In: Vasudevan,
K. (ed.). Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises of India. ENVIS
Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas. Wildlife Institute of
India, Dehradun.
Bhupathy, S. & B.C. Choudhury (1995). Status, Distribution
and Conservation of the Travancore Tortoise Indotestudo
forstenii in the Western Ghats. Journal of the Bombay
Natural History Society 92: 16–21.
Bhupathy, S. & V.S. Vijayan (1993). Aspects of the feeding
ecology of Lissemys punctata (Reptilia: Trionychidae) in
Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur, India. Hamadryad 18:
13–16.
Bhupathy, S. & V.S. Vijayan (1994). Aestivation of turtles in
Keoladeo National Park, Bharatpur with special reference
to Lissemys punctata (Reptilia: Trionychidae). Journal of
the Bombay Natural History Society 91(3): 398–402.
CFH/MCBT (2006). Conservation Action Plan for
Endangered Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises of India.
Madras Crocodile Bank Trust, Post Bag 4, Mamallapuram,
Tamil Nadu, South India.
Das, I. (1991). Colour Guide to the Turtles and Tortoises
of the Indian Subcontinent. R & A Publishing Limited,
Portishead, 133pp.
Das, I. & S. Bhupathy (2009). Melanochelys trijuga (Schweigger
1812) - Indian Black Turtle. In: Rhodin, A.G.J., P.C.H.
Pritchard, P.P. van Dijk, R.A. Saumure, K.A. Buhlmann,
J.B. Iverson & R.A. Mittermeier (eds.). Conservation
Biology of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: A Compilation
Project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle
Specialist Group. Chelonian Research Monographs No. 5,
pp. 038.1–038.9, doi:10.3854/crm.5.038.trijuga.v1.2009,
http://www.iucn-tftsg.org/cbftt/
Deepak, V. & K. Vasudevan (2009). Endemic turtles of India.
In: Vasudevan, K. (ed.). Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises
of India. ENVIS Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas.
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun.
Deepak, V., M. Ramesh., S. Bhupathy & K. Vasudevan
(2011). Indotestudo travancorica (Boulenger 1907) -
Travancore Tortoise. In: Rhodin, A.G.J., P.C.H. Pritchard,
P.P. van Dijk, R.A. Saumure, K.A. Buhlmann, J.B. Iverson
& R.A. Mittermeier (eds.). Conservation Biology of
Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: A Compilation Project of
the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist
Group. Chelonian Research Monographs No. 5, pp. 054.1–
054.6, doi:10.3854/crm.5.054.travancorica.v1.2011, http://
www.iucn-tftsg.org/cbftt/.
Gilchrist, G., M. Mallory & F. Merkel (2005). Can local
ecological knowledge contribute to wildlife management?
Case studies of migratory birds. Ecology and Society 10:
20.
Groombridge, B., E.O. Moll & J. Vijaya (1984). Rediscovery
of a rare Indian turtle. Oryx 17: 130–134.
Gupta, A. (2000). The beleagured chelonians of northeastern
India. Turtle and Tortoise Newsletter 6: 16–17.
Hoffmann, M., C. Hilton-Taylor, A. Angulo, M. Böhm, T.M.
Brooks, S.H.M. Butchart, K.E. Carpenter, J. Chanson, B.
Collen, N.A. Cox, W.R.T. Darwall, N.K. Dulvy, L.R.
Harrison, V. Katariya, C.M. Pollock, S. Quader, N.I.
Richman, A.S.L. Rodrigues, M.F. Tognelli, J. Vié,
J.M. Aguiar, D.J. Allen, G.R. Allen, G. Amori, N.B.
Ananjeva, F. Andreone, P. Andrew, A.L.A. Ortiz, J.E.M.
Baillie, R. Baldi, B.D. Bell, S.D. Biju, J.P. Bird, P. Black-
Decima, J.J. Blanc, F. Bolaños, W. Bolivar-G., I.J.
Burfield, J.A. Burton, D.R. Capper, F. Castro, G.
Catullo, R.D. Cavanagh, A. Channing, N.L. Chao, A.M.
Chenery, F. Chiozza, V. Clausnitzer, N.J. Collar, L.C.
Collett, B.B. Collette, C.F.C. Fernandez, M.T.
Craig, M.J. Crosby, N. Cumberlidge, A. Cuttelod, A.E.
Derocher, A.C. Diesmos, J.S. Donaldson, J.W.
Duckworth, G. Dutson, S.K. Dutta, R.H. Emslie, A.
Farjon, S. Fowler, J. Freyhof, D.L. Garshelis, J.
Gerlach, David J. Gower, T.D. Grant, G.A. Hammerson,
R.B. Harris, L.R. Heaney, S.B. Hedges, J. Hero, B.
Hughes, S.A. Hussain, J.M. Icochea, R.F. Inger, N.
Ishii, D.T. Iskandar, R.K.B. Jenkins, Y. Kaneko, M.
Kottelat, K.M. Kovacs, S.L. Kuzmin, E.L. Marca, J.F.
Lamoreux, M.W.N. Lau, E.O. Lavilla, K. Leus,
R.L. Lewison, G. Lichtenstein, S.R. Livingstone, V.
Lukoschek, D.P. Mallon, P.J.K. McGowan, A.
McIvor, P.D. Moehlman, S. Molur, A.M.Alonso, J.A.
Musick, K. Nowell, R.A. Nussbaum, W. Olech, N.L.
Orlov, T.J. Papenfuss, G. Parra-Olea, W.F. Perrin, B.A.
Polidoro, M. Pourkazemi, P.A. Racey, J.S. Ragle, M.
Ram, G. Rathbun, R.P. Reynolds, A.G.J. Rhodin, S.J.
Richards, L.O. Rodríguez, S.R. Ron, C. Rondinini, A.B.
Rylands, Y.S. de Mitcheson, J.C. Sanciangco, K.L.
Sanders, G. Santos-Barrera, J. Schipper, C. Self-
Sullivan, Y. Shi, A. Shoemaker, F.T. Short, C. Sillero-
Zubiri, D.L. Silvano, K.G. Smith, A.T. Smith, J.
Snoeks, A.J. Stattersfield, A.J. Symes, A.B. Taber, B.K.
Talukdar, H.J. Temple, R. Timmins, J.A. Tobias, K.
3180
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
Tsytsulina, D. Tweddle, C. Ubeda, S.V. Valenti, P.P.van
Dijk, L.M. Veiga, A. Veloso, D.C. Wege, M.
Wilkinson, E.A. Williamson, F. Xie, B.E. Young, H.R.
Akçakaya, L. Bennun, T.M. Blackburn, L. Boitani, H.T.
Dublin, G.A.B. da Fonseca, C. Gascon, T.E. Lacher
Jr., G.M. Mace, S.A. Mainka, J.A. McNeely, R.A.
Mittermeier, G.M. Reid, J.P Rodriguez, A.A.
Rosenberg, M.J. Samways, J. Smart, B.A. Stein & S.N.
Stuart. (2010). The impact of conservation on the status of
the world’s vertebrates. Science 330: 1503–1509.
James, D.A., A.K.H. Bachan & R. Kannan (2011).
Installation of artificial nest cavities for the endangered
Great Hornbill: A pilot study in southern India. The Raffles
Bulletin of Zoology 24: 73–76.
Jose, J., K.K. Ramachandran & P.V. Nair (2007). Occurrence
of the Forest Cane Turtle Geoemyda silvatica (Reptilia,
Testudines, Bataguridae) from a Myristica swamp of
Kulathupuzha Forest Range, Southern Kerala. ENVIS
Newsletter 3: 3-4.
Krishnakumar, K., R. Raghavan & B. Pereira (2009).
Protected on paper, hunted in wetlands: Exploitation and
trade of freshwater turtles (Melanochelys trijuga coronata
and Lissemys punctata punctata) in Punnamada, Kerala,
India. Tropical Conservation Science 2: 363–373.
Lescureux, N., J.D.C. Linnell, S. Mustafa, D. Melovski,
A. Stojanov, G. Ivanov, V. Avukatov, M. Von Arx & B.
Urs (2011). Fear of the unknown: Local knowledge and
perceptions of the Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx in western
Macedonia. Oryx 45: 600–607.
Meijaard, E., K. Mengersen, D. Buchori, A. Nurcahyo, M.
Ancrenaz, S. Wich, S.S.U. Atmoko, A. Tjiu, D. Prasetyo,
Nardiyono, Y. Hadiprakarsa, L. Christy, J. Wells, G.
Albar & A.J. Marshall (2011). Why don’t we ask? A
complementary method for assessing the status of great
apes. PLoS One 6: e18008.
Moll, E.O., B. Groombridge & J. Vijaya (1986). Rediscription
of the cane turtle with notes on its natural history and
classification. Journal of the Bombay National History
Society 83: 112–126.
Nair, T. (2011). Decentralisation and the cultural politics
of natural resource management in Kerala, India.
Envirnomental Justice and Global Citizenship, Oxford,
U.K.
Newing, H. (2010). Conducting Research in Conservation:
Social Science Methods and Practice. Routledge, London.
Pasha, M.K.S., R. Dutta & S. Sinha (2009). Illegal trade of
fresh water turtles and tortoises in India. In: Vasudevan,
K. (ed.). Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises of India. ENVIS
Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas. Wildlife Institute of
India, Dehradun.
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
Pillay, R., A.J.T. Johnsingh, R. Raghunath & M.D.
Madhusudan (2011). Patterns of spatiotemporal change in
large mammal distribution and abundance in the southern
Western Ghats, India. Biological Conservation 144: 1567-
1576.
Ramesh, M. (2004). A note on external injury in wild
Travancore Tortoises (Indotestudo travancorica). Reptile
Rap 6: 1.
Ramesh M. (2008). Preliminary survey of Indotestudo
travancorica (Testudinidae) at the Indira Gandhi Wildlife
Sanctuary, southern India. Hamadryad 33: 118–120.
Ravaloharimanitra, M., T. Ratolojanahary, J.
Rafalimandimby, A. Rajaonson, L. Rakotonirina, T.
Rasolofoharivelo, J.N. Ndriamiary, J. Andriambololona,
C. Nasoavina, P. Fanomezantsoa, J.C. Rakotoarisoa,
Youssouf, J. Ratsimbazafy, R. Dolch & T. King (2011).
Gathering local knowledge in Madagascar results in a
major increase in the known range and number of sites for
critically endangered Greater Bamboo Lemurs (Prolemur
simus). International Journal of Primatology 32: 776–
792.
Stuart, B.L. & J. Thorbjarnarson (2003). Biological
prioritization of Asian countries for turtle conservation.
Chelonian Conservation and Biology 4: 642–647.
Turtle Conservation Coalition (2011). Turtles in trouble:
The world’s 25+ most endangered tortoises and freshwater
turtles 2011. In: Rhodin, A.G.J., A.D. Walde, B.D. Horne,
P.P. van Dijk, T. Blanck & R. Hudson (eds.). IUCN/
SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group;
Turtle Conservation Fund; Turtle Survival Alliance;
Turtle Conservancy; Chelonian Research Foundation;
Conservation International; Wildlife Conservation Society
and San Diego Zoo Global, Lunenburg.
Vasudevan, K., B. Pandav & V. Deepak (2010). Ecology
of Two Endemic Turtles in The Western Ghats. Wildlife
Institute of India, Dehradun, 74pp.
Vijaya, J. (1982a). Rediscovery of the Forest Cane Turtle
(Heosemys silvatica) of Kerala. Hamadryad 7: 2–3.
Vijaya, J. (1982b). Rediscovery of the Forest Cane Turtle
Heosemys (Geomyda) Silvatica (Reptilia, Testudines,
Emydidae) from Chalakudy forests in Kerala. Journal of
the Bombay National History Society 79: 676–677.
Vijaya, J. (1984). Cane Turtle (Heosemys silvatica) study
project in Kerala. Hamadryad 9: 4.
Vijaya, J. (1988). Status of the Forest Cane Turtle (Geomyda
silvatica). Hamadryad 13: 10.
Whitaker, N. & J. Vijaya (2009). Biology of the Forest Cane
Turtle Vijayachelys silvatica, in south India. Chelonian
Conservation and Biology 8: 109–115.
Zar, J.H. (2010). Biostatistical Analysis—5 th Edition. Pearson
Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 944pp.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182
3181

Threatened turtles of Anamalai Hills
A. Kanagavel & R. Raghavan
Author Details: Ar u n Ka n a g a v e l, keen on
research that would inform conservation action,
is interested in social dimensions that influence
perception of nature and its conservation and
the potential of local communities in linking
biodiversity conservation and protected areas.
Ra j e e v Ra g h a v a n is interested in interdisciplinary
research that is focused on generating
information and developing methods to support
conservation decision making. He is particularly
interested in conservation issues in freshwater
ecosystems of the Western Ghats.
Author Contribution: AK undertook field work,
collected data and carried out the analysis. AK
and RR wrote the manuscript.
Acknowledgements: The first author would
like to thank Fibin Baby and S. Rajkumar
for helping with data collection; Baiju, P.A.
Kanagavel, Vijayalakshmi and the many
officials at Aanakayam, Athirapilly, Pokayilapara,
Vazhachal and Vellikulangara forest stations
for their assistance in field logistics; K.H. Amita
Bachan for sharing shape files of the study area;
Susanna Paisley and Peter Bennett (DICE,
University of Kent, Canterbury, UK) for their
help during the project formulation stage; Helen
Meredith and Jonathan Baillie (ZSL, London)
for useful discussions. This study would not
have materialized if not for the participation of
the local communities at the study sites. The
authors also thank three anonymous reviewers
and the subject editor for their comments
and suggestions which greatly improved the
manuscript. The study was carried out with
official permission from the Kerala State Forest
and Wildlife Department (WL 12-7326/2010)
and financially supported by the Zoological
Society of London (ZSL) Erasmus Darwin Barlow
Expedition grant 2010 to the first author.
3182
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3173–3182

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(13): 3183–3189
Status and conservation of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
Hoolock leuconedys in Assam, India
Rekha Chetry 1 , Dilip Chetry 2 & P.C.Bhattacharjee 3
1
Department of Zoology, Jawaharlal Nehru College, Boko, Kamrup, Assam 781123, India
1,2,3
Gibbon Conservation Centre, Gibbon Wildlife Sanctuary, Mariani, Jorhat, Assam 785634, India
2
Aaranyak, 50, Samanway Path, Survey, Beltola, Guwahati, Assam 781028, India
3
Department of Zoology, Gauhati University, Guwahati, Assam 7810014, India
Email: 1 chetryrekha@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 dilip@aaranyak.org, 3 bhattapc@sify.com
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Mewa Singh
Manuscript details:
Ms # o3073
Received 19 January 2012
Final received 15 May 2012
Finally accepted 16 August 2012
Citation: Chetry, R., D. Chetry & P.C.
Bhattacharjee (2012). Status and conservation
of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon Hoolock leuconedys
in Assam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa
4(13): 3183–3189.
Abstract: A field survey was conducted in 2010 from March to May in the reserve
forests of Sadiya sub-division, in the Tinsukia District of Assam, India, to investigate the
status of the Hoolock Gibbon. The data were collected using modified line-transect and
call-count methods. We recorded 10 groups of gibbons in three reserve forests, through
direct sighting. Of the 33 individuals recorded through direct sighting 63.6% were adults,
21.2% juveniles and 15.2% infants. The average group size of the sighted groups was
3.3 individuals, with an adult sex ratio of 1:1.1. We also recorded 10 groups of Rhesus
Macaques in the area. Anthropogenic pressures included encroachment, felling of trees
and inadequate infrastructure, and these were the major threats for Hoolock Gibbon and
other wildlife in the region. Notably, the gibbons of Sadiya have been identified as the
Eastern Hoolock Gibbon Hoolock leuconedys and this is the first report of the species
from Assam.
Keywords: Conservation, Eastern Hoolock Gibbon, Hoolock leuconedys, Sadiya,
status, threat.
Copyright: © Rekha Chetry, Dilip Chetry &
P.C.Bhattacharjee 2012. Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows
unrestricted use of this article in any medium for
non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution
by providing adequate credit to the authors and
the source of publication.
For Author Details, Author Contribution and
Acknowledgements: See end of this article.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B2F59F55-
366B-4E09-875C-CB772BA7516D
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
INTRODUCTION
Assam, one of the seven states in northeastern India, supports a rich
biodiversity, with primates forming an important component. Out of the
25 species of non-human primates in India, nine species—Slow Loris
Nycticebus bengalensis, Rhesus Macaque Macaca mulatta, Assamese
Macaque Macaca assamensis, Pig-tailed Macaque Macaca leonina,
Stump-tailed Macaque Macaca arctoides, Capped Langur Trachypithecus
pileatus, Golden Langur Trachypithecus geei, Phayre’s Langur
Trachypithecus phayrei and Western Hoolock Gibbon Hoolock hoolock—
are present in Assam. The Western Hoolock Gibbon is so far the sole ape
recorded from Assam. Several studies have already been carried out on
the status and distribution of Hoolock Gibbon in Assam (Mohnot 1995–
2001; Das et al. 2005; Chetry et al. 2007; Choudhury 2006, 2009; Kakati
et al. 2009). Sadiya is a subdivision of Tinsukia District of Assam and it
is the extreme eastern boundary of the state. Administratively, Sadiya is
a part of Assam, yet the area has no land connection with any other part
of the state, and the landmass of Sadiya is continuous with the Lower
Dibang Valley District of neighbouring Arunachal Pradesh. There are six
reserve forests in the subdivision of Sadiya range of Doomdooma Forest
Division of eastern Assam circle. The reserve forests are Hallowgaon,
Kukuramara, Kundil Kalia, Sadiya West Block and Sadiya North Block,
covering 125.12km 2 of forest. Studies were carried out from time to time
to understand the primate diversity of the state, including Sadiya. The
Indo-US Primate project first did an extensive primate survey in Sadiya
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3183–3189 3183

Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Assam
range during 1994 (Mohnot 1995–2001), followed by
another survey of primates in Sadiya (Sharma & Sinha
2007). Western Hoolock Gibbon occurred in the area
in each study, but the unique geographic location of
the area stimulated us to give a second thought about
the identity of the gibbons of Sadiya. Discovery of the
Eastern Hoolock Gibbon H. leuconedys in the Mehao
Wildlife Sanctuary, and its adjacent Kornu Reserve
Forest in Arunachal Pradesh (Chetry et al. 2007,
2008, 2010; Chetry 2009) also made us reconsider
the identity of the gibbons of Sadiya. Considering
the land continuity of Sadiya with the Lower Dibang
Valley District of Arunachal Pradesh, we hypothesised
those gibbons of Sadiya to be Eastern Hoolock.
Hence, to verify our hypothesis, we carried out a fresh
survey of Hoolock Gibbons in the Sadiya area, after
we confirmed here, for the first time, the occurrence of
Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Sadiya and, for that matter,
in Assam (Chetry & Chetry 2010) (Image 1). We also
report the anthropogenic pressures on the species and
its habitats, so that effective conservation measures
can be developed for Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in the
study area in future.
© Dilip Chetry
Image 1. Eastern hoolock Gibbon from Sadiya
MATERIALS AND METHODS
R. Chetry et al.
The Sadiya subdivision is located at 95 0 40’1’’E
& 27 0 45’02’’N, covering an area of 789.95km 2
(Image 2). We conducted a field survey in 2010 from
March to May in the reserve forests of Sadiya subdivision,
in the Tinsukia District of Assam, India.
The topography is a flat plain, gradually sloping from
north to south. The vegetation in this area has been
described as Assam valley tropical wet evergreen forest
(Champion & Seth 1968). The forests in the study
area have an upper canopy of Michelia champaca,
Shorea assamica, Terminalia myriocarpa. The
middle canopy is mostly dominated by Vatica
lanceaefolia and Mesua ferrea, along with Bombax
ceiba, Terminalia belerica, Canarium resinifesum,
Terminalia chebula, Eugenia jambolana, Sapium
baccatum, Dillenia indica and Bischofia javanica.
(i) Direct method
We followed modified line transect method
(Burnham et al. 1980; NRC 1981) for the survey,
depending on the habitat and the forest condition.
We laid the transects in a stratified random manner
to cover all representative areas of the park (Mueller-
Dombois et al. 1974; Kent et al. 1994). The total
length of the transects was 212km. Three observers
walked randomly through existing forest trails and
occasionally forest tracts without trails covering
an average of 10–12 km/day. We initiated the walk
transects in the morning (0600h) and terminated in the
evening (1500h). The observers walked slowly along
the transect pausing at regular intervals of 500m. On
sighting the gibbon, we recorded the GPS (Global
Positioning System) location, the group structure and
individual details, such as age, sex and number of
individuals. At 500m intervals, and at each location
where the gibbon was encountered, the observers
estimated tree height and canopy cover within an area
of 10m radius and also took note of the evidence and
degree of grazing and logging in the study area.
(ii) Indirect method
A. Call-count method: This involved recording
hoolock gibbon calls. Whenever calls were heard in
the absence of sightings, the distance of the call was
estimated and recorded along with time, direction,
duration and GPS co-ordinates of the observers.
3184
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3183–3189

Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Assam
R. Chetry et al.
Map showing Sadia in Indian context
Image 1. Map of study site
B. We also recorded some secondary information
relevant to the study, such as information about hunting
and traditional beliefs, through informal interaction
with forest field staff, local guides and elderly people.
RESULTS
Population status
For the first time the occurrence of Eastern Hoolock
Gibbon from the Sadiya subdivision of Assam is
reported. A total of 32 individuals in 10 groups were
recorded, based on direct sighting from three reserve
forests in Sadiya (Table 1). Again, based on call count,
the occurrence of another 16 groups was estimated
(Table 2, Image 3).
Population distribution
The survey covered 212km of transects in various
parts of the reserve forests and hoolock gibbons were
found within an altitudinal range of 100–176 m.
Group size and age composition
The group structure and composition of the sighted
groups are shown in Table 1. The average group size
was three with individuals ranging from 1 to 5. Most
of the groups were observed with either 2 (4 groups)
or 4 (2 groups) individuals. The adult sex ratio was
1:1.1. Age classification shows that, of the total sighted
population, 63.6% were adults, 21.2% juveniles and
15.2% infants.
Sighting time and call time
Of the 10 groups sighted directly, sighting time of
all groups (10 groups) was before 1200h. All gibbon
calls were recorded before 1200h, of average duration
15.25 minutes, with a range between 10–25 minutes.
Primate diversity of Sadiya
During the survey period we recorded the
occurrence of only Rhesus Macaque Macaca mulatta
besides the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Sadiya. We
sighted 120 Rhesus Macaques in 10 groups.
Local extinction of hoolock gibbon
We interacted with the local people of all six reserve
forests to know about the past status of gibbons in the
areas. All these interactions have led us to conclude
that gibbons were common in all forests of Sadiya
in the past. Only 50 years ago all the reserve forests
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3183–3189
3185

Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Assam
R. Chetry et al.
Table 1. Sighting records of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
Location Altitude Locality Time AM AF J? I? Total
1 N 27˚50'39.2'' E 95˚45'52.9'' 122m Hallawgaon 0925 1 2 1 1 3
2 N 27˚50'54.9'' E 95˚45'30.9'' 120m Hallawgaon 0650 1 1 2
3 N 27˚50'46.2'' E 95˚50'28.3'' 121m Kukurmara 0820 1 1 2
4 N 27˚50'42.6'' E 95˚50'18.8'' 120m Kukurmara 1030 1 1 1 4
5 N 27˚57'05.1'' E 95˚50'04.8'' 133m Kundil Kalia 0807 1 1 1 1 4
6 N 27˚56'56.6'' E 95˚50'.21.7'' 140m Kundil Kalia 0830 1 1 2
7 N 27˚57'06.9'' E 95˚50'.049'' 140m Kundil Kalia 0830 1 1 1 1 4
8 N 27˚57'07.1'' E 95˚50'.21.6'' 176m Kundil Kalia 0930 1 1 2
9 N 27˚57'07.2'' E 95˚50'.21.5'' 176m Kundil Kalia 0930 1 1 1 1 4
10 N 27˚57'07.6'' E 95˚50'.21.6'' 156m Kundil Kalia 1000 1 1 2 1 5
TOTAL 10 11 7 5 32
AM - Adult male; AF - Adult female; J? - Juvenile unidentified; I? - Infant unidentified
Table 2. Records of call count
Location Altitude Locality Duration in mins
1 N 27˚50'54.9'' E 95˚45'30.9'' 120m Hallawgaon 0900-0915h = 15
2 N 27˚50'38.2'' E 95˚45'5.7'' 122m Hallawgaon 1022-1038h = 16
3 N 27˚50'53.3'' E 95˚51'03.4'' 122m Kukurmara 1010-1020h = 10
4 N 27˚50'42.0'' E 95˚51'04.1'' 100m Kukurmara 1100-1110h = 10
5 N 27˚50'44.4'' E 95˚50'10.9'' 122m Kukurmara 0615-0634h = 19
6 N 27˚50'52.2'' E 95˚50'50.1'' 120m Kukurmara 0708-0725h = 17
7 N 27˚57'06'' E 95˚49'46.9'' 139m Kundil Kalia 1147-1200h = 13
8 N 27˚57'16.6'' E 95˚49'27.9'' 136m Kundil Kalia 0920-0930h = 10
9 N 27˚57'10.6'' E 95˚49'46.9'' 138m Kundil Kalia 1000-1010h = 10
10 N 27˚57'18.2'' E 95˚49'19.5'' 144m Kundil Kalia 0900-0910h = 10
11 N 27˚57'17.9'' E 95˚49'47.6'' 135m Kundil Kalia 0604-0625h = 21
12 N 27˚57'07.1'' E 95˚50'04.0'' 141m Kundil Kalia 0730-0750h = 20
13 N 27˚57'07.1'' E 95˚50'04.0'' 141m Kundil Kalia 0750-0800h = 10
14 N 27˚57'05.1'' E 95˚50'04.8'' 160m Kundil Kalia 0715-0730h = 15
15 N 27˚57'06.9'' E 95˚50'21.6'' 140m Kundil Kalia 0830-0853h = 23
16 N 27˚57'16.8'' E 95˚49'27.8'' 133m Kundil Kalia 0720-0745h = 25
had populations of gibbons, but at present there are
no gibbons in any of them (Table 3). This indicates
that the species has become locally extinct from these
three reserve forests. It has been assumed that about
40–45 years ago the species was wiped out by largescale
clearing of forest for human settlement and
agricultural practice.
Threats
During the survey we also tried to identify the
threats for hoolock gibbon and other wildlife of the
area. Based on our observation we have identified the
following threats:
Status of the forest: It is evident that Eastern
Hoolock Gibbon occurs in the reserve forests of Sadiya.
Reserve forests, unlike sanctuaries or national parks,
do not enjoy strong legal protection. Additionally, this
status makes the reserve forests more vulnerable to
various types of exploitation.
Hunting: There was no direct evidence of hunting,
but indirect information supports the occurrence of
the hunting of hoolock gibbon and other wildlife in
Sadiya.
Encroachment: Massive encroachment of
3186
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3183–3189

Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Assam
R. Chetry et al.
Distribution of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Sadia
Image 3. Distribution of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Sadiya
Table 3. Reserve forest, encroachment and extinction
Sno Reserve Forest Area in sq.km
Encroachment area in
sq.km
Eastern Hoolock
Gibbon
1 Hollowgaon 3.71 +
2 Kukuramura 3.65 +
3 Kundil Kolia 72.84 40.00 +
Locally
extinct
Years of
Extinction
4 Sadiya North Block 23.31 7.20 - + 1970
5 Sadiya West Block 5.41 - + 1970
6 Deopani 16.20 13.50 - + 1995
125.12 60.70
forestland for human settlement and for agricultural
activities was observed during the survey. A total of
60.70km 2 of forestland is under encroachment out of
125.12km 2 (Table 3).
Selective logging: Illegal felling of selective trees,
such as Uriam Bischoffia javanica, Simalu Bombax
ceiba, Halak, Tita sopa Michelia champaca, was also
observed during the survey.
Collection of non-timber forest products: Extraction
of non-timber products, such as cane, bamboo and
medicinal plants, is a common practice among the local
community. Cane Calamus spp., bamboo Bambusa
spp., Musa spp., fern species and Tora Alpinia spp. are
also extracted commercially from the forests.
Grazing pressure: There is high grazing pressure
from the surrounding villages, as well as from the
cattle farms.
Lack of awareness: Lack of awareness among
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3183–3189
3187

Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Assam
the local community towards the conservation of
wildlife in general, and the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
in particular, is a perennial problem.
Lack of patrol infrastructure: During the survey,
we observed that there were neither staff quarters nor
a forest department office in any reserve forest for
monitoring or patrolling the forest. There are only
eight forest staff in Sadiya subdivision to combat
illegal activities in the forest.
DISCUSSION
The Eastern Hoolock Gibbon is reported for
the first time from Assam, showing the extended
distribution of the species in India. Earlier, Das et al.
(2006) first reported Eastern Hoolock Gibbon from
Lohit district of Arunachal Pradesh. Then, there was
a report of Eastern Hoolock Gibbons from the lower
Dibang Valley District of Arunachal Pradesh (Chetry
et al. 2008; Chetry 2009; Chetry et al. 2010).
There were 26 groups of Eastern Hoolock
Gibbons in three reserve forests, namely Halaugaon,
Kukuramara and Kundil Kalia. With this finding,
the Sadiya area is established as the single habitat
pocket of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in the state of
Assam. According to Das et al. (2006), the average
group size for the gibbon was 3.37, while Chetry et
al. (2009) recorded an average group size of 3.14 in
Mehao Wildlife Sanctuary. The average group size
recorded in this study is 3.3. Variation in group size in
different habitats may be due to the differences in the
distribution, abundance and quality of food resources
in the habitat. Regarding the altitudinal distribution
range of the species, Groves (1971) reported that the
Eastern Hoolock Gibbon is distributed at an altitude
range of 1067–1219 m in Myanmar and China.
Similarly, Das et al. (2006) recorded the species
between 122–1075 m in Arunachal Pradesh. Again,
Chetry et al. (2010) reported an altitude range of 142–
1865 m in Mehao Wildlife Sanctuary in Lower Dibang
Valley District of Arunachal Pradesh. In this study, it
is shown that in Sadiya the Eastern Hoolock Gibbons
are distributed between 100–176 m. This clearly
shows that the species is distributed at much lower
elevations than thought earlier. Simalu Bombax ceiba,
Ajar Lagerstroemia speciosa, Halakh Terminalia
myriocarpa and Lata jari Ficus maclellandii were the
R. Chetry et al.
dominant vegetation in the reserve forests.
In addition to the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon, reserve
forests in Sadiya support only one other species of
primate - Macaca mulatta. Regarding other primates
we neither had any direct sighting nor any secondary
information. This indicates that Macaca assamensis,
Trachypithecus pileatus, and Nycticebus bengalensis,
along with Macaca arctoides and Macaca leonina,
which are sympatric to the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
in other habitats, are absent in Sadiya. This absence
of all these species, particularly Macaca assamensis,
Trachypithecus pileatus, and Nycticebus bengalensis,
is significant.
With the addition of the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
Hoolock leuconedys, the primate diversity of Assam
has been increased by another species and this has
undoubtedly made Assam, the Indian state with the
highest primate diversity.
Habitat loss and fragmentation resulting from
encroachment for settlements and agricultural
practices are posing a major threat, not only to the
Eastern Hoolock Gibbon but also to other wildlife in
Sadiya. Habitat loss and fragmentation have already
been identified as the principal threats to gibbons in
the entire distribution range in northeastern India
(Chetry et al. 2007). Sincere efforts for conservation,
involving the local community with long-term vision,
are required, along with population monitoring and
ecological study of the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon.
Viewing Sadiya as the only Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
habitat in Assam, the state forest department should
take immediate steps to conserve this population.
The state government can notify all the three reserve
forests with Eastern Hoolock Gibbons into a sanctuary
to provide more legal protection to the species and its
habitats.
REFERENCES
Burnham, K.P., D.R. Anderson & J.L. Laake (1980).
Estimate of Density from Line Transect Sampling of
Biological Populations. Wildlife Monograph No. 72. The
Wildlife Society, Washington D.C., 202pp.
Champion, H.G. & K. Seth (1968). A Revised Survey of
Forest Types of India. Government of India, Publication,
New Delhi, xxvii+404pp.
Chetry, D. (2009). Conservation of Hoolock Gibbon by
integrating field survey with education and awareness
3188
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3183–3189

Eastern Hoolock Gibbon in Assam
programme in Mehao Wildlife Sanctuary in Arunachal Pradesh, India. Final
project report submitted to CEPF & ATREE, 44pp.
Chetry, D., R. Chetry, A. Das, C.Loma & J. Panor (2008). New Distribution records
of Hoolock leuconedys in India. Primate Conservation 23: 125–128.
Chetry, D., R. Chetry, K. Ghosh & A.K. Singh (2010). Status of Eastern Hoolock
Gibbon (Hoolock leuconedys) population in Mehao Wildlife Sanctuary in
Arunachal Pradesh, India. Primate Conservation 25: 87–94.
Chetry, D., R. Chetry & P.C. Bhattacharjee (2007). Hoolock: The Ape of India.
Gibbon Conservation Centre Press, Assam, India, xii+133pp.
Chetry, R. & D. Chetry (2010). First distribution record of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
in Assam, India. Primate Conservation 25: 95–97.
Choudhury, A.U. (2006). The Distribution and Status of Hoolock Gibbon, Hoolock
hoolock, in Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Nagaland in Northeast India.
Primate Conservation 20: 79–87
Choudhury, A.U. (2009). The Distribution, Status and Conservation of Hoolock
Gibbon, Hoolock hoolock, in Karbi Anglong District, Assam, Northeast India.
Primate Conservation 24: 1–10.
Das, J., J. Biswas, P.C. Bhattacharjee & S.M. Mohnot (2006). First distribution
records of the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon Hoolock hoolock leuconedys from India.
Zoos’ Print Journal 21(7): 2316–2320.
Das, J., P.C. Bhattacharjee, J. Biswas & D. Chetry (2005). Western Hoolock
Gibbon: Socioecology, Threats and Conservation Action Plan. Department of
Zoology, Gauhati University and Primate Research Centre, Northeast centre,
Guwahati, India, 70pp.
Groves, C.P. (1971). Geographic and Individual variation in Bornean gibbons, with
remarks on the systematics of the subgenus Hylobates. Folia Primatologica 14:
139–53.
Kakati, K., R. Raghavan, R. Chellam, Q. Qureshi & D.J. Chivers (2009). Status
of Western Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolock hoolock) populations in fragmented forests
of eastern Assam. Primate Conservation24: 127-137.
Kent, M. & P. Coker (1994). Vegetation Description and Analysis: - A practical
Approach. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 363pp.
Mohnot, S.M. (1995–2001). Indo-US Primate Project Report: Annual Report I, II, III,
IV,V,VI. Department of Zoology, J.N.V. University, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Mueller-Dombois, D. & H. Ellenberg (1974). Aims and Methods of Vegetation
Ecology. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 547pp.
National Research Council (1981). Techniques for the study of Primate Population
Ecology. National Academy Press, Washington D.C., 227pp.
Sharma, N. & A. Sinha (2007). Survey and conservation status of non-human
primates in reserve forest and proposed reserve forests of Eastern Assam Circle.
Final Report to the Assam Forest Department. National Institute of Advanced
studies, Bangalore, 57pp.
Assamese Abstract:
R. Chetry et al.
Author Details: Re k h a Ch e t r y‘s research
interest is on primate behaviour, ecology, and
conservation biology. She has conducted
several field studies on endangered primates of
northeastern India. The corresponding author is
an Assisstant Professor.
Dilip Ch e t r y worked since 1994 in the field
study of primate in northeastern India. He
has particular interest in ecology, behaviour,
conservation of primate and in community
based conservation of biodiversity. He is
Programme Head, Primate Conservation
Division, Aaranyak and also Executive Director
of Gibbon Conservation Centre, Assam, India.
Pa r i m a l Ch a n d r a Bh a t t a c h a r j e e’s research
focus on ecology, ornithology, primatology and
biodiversity conservation. He is former Head
& Professor, Department of Zoology, Gauhati
University, Assam, India
Author Contributions: RC and DC collected
the data in the field. PCB assisted in writing of
manuscript.
Acknowledgements: This report is based on
work sponsored by Primate Conservation Inc.
We are grateful to Noel Rowe for his generous
support. We acknowledge our gratitude to Assam
Forest Department, Government of Assam
for providing us the necessary permission for
conducting the survey and other logistical
support. Thanks are due to the staff of Sadiya
Forest Range specially Mr. Amarendra Pathak,
Mr. Susen Koch, Mr. Rabi Gohain, and Mr.
Thapa. We are also most grateful to Prof. Colin
Groves, Prof. Warren.Y. Brokelman and Prof.
Thomas Geissmann for helping us to identify
the gibbons. We thank: Mr. Lalit Saikia and Mr.
Pradip Baruah who assisted us in the field; Mr.
Dimbeswar Chutia, Mr. Raju Lahan and Shambu
Bauri who guided us in the forest. Special
thanks go to Prof. David J. Chivers for going
through the manuscript with valuable inputs and
corrections.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3183–3189
3189

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(13): 3190–3204
Studies on taxonomy and distribution of Acridoidea
(Orthoptera) of Bihar, India
Mohd. Kamil Usmani 1 & Md. Rashid Nayeem 2
1,2
Section of Entomology, Department of Zoology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh 202002, India
Email: 1 rashidnayeem48@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 usmanikamil94@gmail.com
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: R.K. Avasthi
Manuscript details:
Ms # o3010
Received 16 November 2011
Final received 10 September 2012
Finally accepted 21 September 2012
Citation: Usmani, M.K. & M.R. Nayeem
(2012). Studies on taxonomy and distribution of
Acridoidea (Orthoptera) of Bihar, India. Journal
of Threatened Taxa 4(13): 3190–3204.
Copyright: © Mohd. Kamil Usmani & Md. Rashid
Nayeem 2012. Creative Commons Attribution
3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted
use of this article in any medium for non-profit
purposes, reproduction and distribution by
providing adequate credit to the authors and the
source of publication.
Author Details: See end of this artilce.
Author Contribution: MRN collected, identified
and described the specimens. MKU confirmed
the identification, and reviewed the entire
manuscript.
Acknowledgements: We extend our gratitude
to the Department of Science & Technology,
New Delhi for providing financial assistance
during the tenure of a major research project
(Ref. No. SR/SO/AS 32/2008) being carried out
on Biosystematics and Biodiversity of Acridoidea
(Orthoptera) in northern India. Thanks are also
due to Prof. Irfan Ahmad, Chairman, Department
of Zoology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh for
providing necessary facilities.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:89A1DADD
-0DBF-4C6B-B59A-39B4ED58D75F
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
Abstract: Thirty seven species of locusts and grasshoppers representing 26 genera, four
tribes and 12 subfamilies belonging to the families Pyrgomorphidae, Catantopidae and
Acrididae are reported from different localities of Bihar. Their distinguishing characters
and bio-ecological data are provided along with keys to tribes and subfamilies. This
paper comprising of distribution and field observation along with taxonomy of Acridoid
fauna is the first of its kind from the state.
Keywords: Acridoidea, Bihar, biodiversity, distribution, Orthoptera, taxonomy.
Introduction
Acridoidea is one of the most sought after superfamilies of the
order Orthoptera. The order Orthoptera consists of insects with
paurometabolous or incomplete metamorphosis, including grasshoppers,
crickets and locusts. Many insects in this order produce sound (known
as stridulation) by rubbing their wings or their legs against each other,
the wings or legs contain rows of corrugated bumps. They are also well
adapted for flight since both direct and indirect muscles work together
during flight movements thus explaining the reason that these insects can
cover long distances during swarming conditions that mainly result from
overcrowding and scarcity of food.
Acridoidea is an important Superfamily of the suborder Caelifera
(Short-horned Grasshoppers with three segmented tarsi and a short
ovipositor), the others are Tridactyloidea, Tetrigoidea and Eumastacoidea.
Tetrigoidea is easily distinguishable from Acridoidea by the elongated
pronotum, usually extending beyond the end of the body; by the absence of
an arolium between the claws and the two-segmented tarsi of the fore and
middle legs. The other superfamilies of Caelifera are easily recognizable
at sight and are not frequently encountered. Superfamily Acridoidea has
shown maximum diversity and divided into various families of which
the families Acrididae, Catantopidae and Pyrgomorphidae are widely
distributed in India.
A notable taxonomical work on Acrididae was made by Kirby (1914)
in the series ‘Fauna of British India’ and he divided the family Acrididae
into eight subfamilies. Uvarov (1921, 1924, 1927, 1942) studied in detail
the Indian Acrididae. Agarwala (1952) contributed some studies on
female copulatory structures in relation to oviposition sites while Roonwal
(1956) contributed some studies on the nymphal structures and ecology on
Acrididae. Dirsh (1965, 1975), Tandon (1975, 1976), Bhowmik (1985),
Shishodia (1987, 1997, 1999), Shishodia et al. (2010), Usmani & Shafee
3190
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

Acridoidea of Bihar
(1980, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985a,b, 1990), Kumar &
Virktamath (1991a,b), Hazra et al. (1993), Usmani
(2005) have contributed works on the taxonomy of
this group. More recently, Tandon & Khera (1978),
Julka et al. (1982), Dey & Hazra (2003), Nayeem &
Usmani (2011, 2012) have worked on the taxonomy
as well as on the ecology of this group.
The species represented in this region are briefly
described. In the present study the authors uphold
recent workers in classifying Acridoidea with a
few generally accepted changes. The superfamily
Acridoidea is understood here in the same sense as
by Uvarov (1966). There are very few reports on
the taxonomy of Acridoidea from this region. The
latest work has been carried out by Shishodia et al.
(2010). Keeping in view the above facts, the present
work is aimed at studying one of the superfamilies of
Orthoptera which is widely distributed and shows a
very high degree of biological diversity.
Bihar is one of the most important eastern states
of India and has a notified forest area of 6,764.14km²
and is a vast stretch of fertile plain that consists of a
thick alluvial mantle of drift origin overlying in most
parts. The soil is mainly young loam rejuvenated
every year by constant deposition of silt, clay and sand
brought by different streams. It is mainly drained by
the Ganga River, including its northern tributaries
Gandak and Kosi that regularly flood parts of the
Bihar plains. The state lies between 25 0 8’–27 0 31’N
and 83 0 20’–88 0 17’E occupying an area of 94,163km 2 .
The average elevation of the state is 52.73m above
sea level. Topographically, Bihar can be grouped into
three regions: the northern mountainous region, the
Indo-Gangetic Plain and the southern plateau.
This fertile alluvial tract is the product of various
Himalayan and peninsular rivers like Gandak, Budhi
Gandak, Koshi, Mahananda, Bagmati, Gogra and Son
and other small rivers and rivulets. The Gangetic
plains of Bihar is divided into north and south by the
Ganga River which flows through it. Being located
between 25–27 0 North latitude, the climate of Bihar
is mostly subtropical. The average temperature in
summer is 35–40 degrees C during March–May.
April and June are the hottest months of the year.
The average temperature in winter is 5–10 degrees C
during December–January. Bihar gets its maximum
rainfall during the south-west monsoon from June to
September. The average rainfall of Bihar is around
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
120cm. The natural vegetation of Bihar is moist
deciduous forests. These forests are mostly found in
the northern and southern parts of the state.
Agriculture is the backbone of Bihar’s economy
employing 81% of the workforce and generating nearly
42% of the State Domestic Product. The percentage of
population employed in agriculture in Bihar is much
higher than the national average. The gross and net
sown area in the state is estimated at 80,000km 2 and
56,000km 2 , respectively. The principal crops are
paddy, wheat, pulses, maize, potato, sugarcane, oil
seeds, tobacco and jute. Rice, wheat and maize are the
major crops. During the survey it was concluded (based
on field observation) that at an average, agricultural
fields of paddy and wheat have shown maximum
infestation of Aiolopus sp. followed by Oxya sp. and
Hieroglyphus sp., the grasslands had Spathosternum
and Tristria as commonly found genera, shrubs and
bushy patches and plantations of pulses mainly arhar
were home to Catantops sp., Xenocatantops sp. and
Chrotogonous sp. while areas of wild vegetation had
Oedipoda, Locusta, Catantops and Eyprepocnemis in
common.
If we talk about the field observation it may be
concluded that the majority of the areas of southern and
southwestern Bihar had more infestation as compared
to the northern and northeastern regions of the state.
The insects were observed to be less active during the
morning and evening hours as compared to the sunlit
hours of the day. At dawn hours the concentration of
grasshoppers was more in the sunlit patches of the
fields and one could rarely find them in shadowed
areas. In maize and sugarcane fields especially,their
concentration was more above the ground i.e. on plant
parts rather than on the ground in grasses, while in the
case of vegetables they were more in numbers on the
ground in grasses and very few were spotted resting
on the plant parts.
In the present study 37 species representing 29
genera belonging to three families, 12 subfamilies and
four tribes have been recorded from various regions of
Bihar (Table 1). The specimens studied in this work
are deposited in the Department of Zoology, Aligarh
Muslim University, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204
3191

Acridoidea of Bihar
MATERIAL AND METHODS
About 277 specimens of grasshoppers were
collected from various agricultural pastural areas of
Bihar and forest habitats. This served as the basis for
the present critical study. A complete record was also
maintained indicating the reference number, locality,
date of collection and name of host plants etc.
(I) Collection of adult grasshoppers
The authors surveyed various agricultural areas of
Bihar during the period 2009–2010 for the collection
of grasshoppers and locusts. They were caught by
hand, by forceps, and by the ordinary aerial insect net.
The net was used for catching insects individually or
by sweeping on grasses, bushes and other vegetables.
Since some acridoids live on trees, it is sometimes
highly rewarding to investigate the branches of trees.
Attempts were made to collect the specimens from their
host plants as well as those attracted to light during
the night. They were captured on different dates in
different months from various crops. Different parts
of crops were examined. Attention was also given to
fruits and vegetables. The collected specimens were
killed in cyanide bottles.
(II) Preparations for morphological studies
Dry mounts were also prepared for better
understanding of certain characters like size, colour,
texture etc. For this purpose, the specimens were
first relaxed, stretched and later they were pinned and
labeled properly. Permanent collections of pinned
specimens were kept in store boxes and cabinets for
further studies on their morphological structures.
(III) Preparations for genitalic studies
For a detailed study of the various components
of genitalia, permanent slides were prepared and
examined under a microscope in order to conduct a
detailed study of the genitalic structures. Drawings
were initially made with the help of camera lucida.
Details were filled in by conventional microscope
examination.
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
Table 1. Geographic coordinates of collection sites
S.No. Site Coordinates
1 Ara 25.3400 0 N & 84.4000 0 E
2 Araria 26.1500 0 N & 87.5200 0 E
3 Aurangabad 24.7500 0 N & 84.3700 0 E
4 Banka 24.8800 0 N & 86.9200 0 E
5 Begusarai 25.4200 0 N & 86.1300 0 E
6 Bettiah 26.8000 0 N & 84.5000 0 E
7 Bhabua 25.0500 0 N & 83.6200 0 E
8 Bhagalpur 25.1500 0 N & 87.0200 0 E
9 Bihar Sharif 25.2100 0 N & 85.2000 0 E
10 Buxar 25.3338 0 N & 83.5850 0 E
11 Chhapra 25.7848 0 N & 84.7274 0 E
12 Darbhanga 26.1700 0 N & 85.9000 0 E
13 Gaya 24.7800 0 N & 85.0000 0 E
14 Gopalganj 26.4700 0 N & 84.4300 0 E
15 Hajipur 25.6800 0 N & 85.2200 0 E
16 Jamui 24.9200 0 N & 86.2200 0 E
17 Jehanabad 25.1300 0 N & 84.5900 0 E
18 Katihar 25.5300 0 N & 87.5800 0 E
19 Khagaria 25.5000 0 N & 86.4800 0 E
20 Kishanganj 25.7000 0 N & 86.9500 0 E
21 Luckeesarai 25.1833 0 N & 86.0833 0 E
22 Madhepura 25.9167 0 N & 86.7833 0 E
23 Madhubani 26.3700 0 N & 86.0800 0 E
24 Motihari 26.6500 0 N & 84.9200 0 E
25 Munger 25.3800 0 N & 86.4700 0 E
26 Muzaffarpur 26.1200 0 N & 85.4000 0 E
27 Nawada 24.8800 0 N & 85.5300 0 E
28 Patna 25.6155 0 N & 85.1355 0 E
29 Purnia 25.7800 0 N & 87.4700 0 E
30 Rajgir 25.0300 0 N & 85.4200 0 E
31 Saharsa 25.8800 0 N & 86.6000 0 E
32 Samastipur 25.8500 0 N & 85.7800 0 E
33 Sasaram 24.9500 0 N & 84.0300 0 E
34 Sitamarhi 26.6000 0 N & 85.4800 0 E
35 Siwan 25.1300 0 N & 83.8800 0 E
36 Supaul 25.9300 0 N & 86.2500 0 E
Results
Taxonomic Account
Superfamily: Acridoidea Latreille, 1802
The Superfamily Acridoidea is represented by
three families.
3192
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

Acridoidea of Bihar
A. Family: Pyrgomorphidae Brunner, 1874
Tribe: Atractomorphini Bolivar, 1884
1. Atractomorpha psittacina (Haan, 1842)
Diagnostic characters: Small to medium sized
body, slender in shape, filiform antennae inserted in
front of lateral ocellus, fastigial furrow present, eyes
elongate oval, lateral margins of head and pronotum
tuberculated, lateral pronotal lobe with a membranous
area in metazona, prosternal process antero-posteriorly
compressed.
Material examined: 1 male, 23.x.2010, on
underlying grasses in vegetable field, Chhapra, Saran;
1 male, 2 females, 25.x.2010, on grasses, Motihari,
Purba Champaran.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 23.85,
Tegmina 18.2, Hind femur 9.5, Pronotum 2.55.
Female: Body 35.2, Tegmina 25.0, Hind femur 11.75,
Pronotum 6.3
Remarks: Commonly found in grasses of vegetable
field but may also be found in cereals.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh.
2. Atractomorpha sinensis (Bolivar, 1905)
Diagnostic characters: Body medium sized and
slender, tegmina fully developed, tapered and pointed,
eyes comparatively short, roundish oval, lateral
pronotal lobe with a membranous area in metzona,
fastigium of vertex broader and flatter, rose colour at
the base of hind wings.
Material examined: 3 females, 24.x.2010, on
grasses, Gopalganj; 1 female, 27.x.2010, on grasses,
Hajipur, Vaishali; 1 female, 26.x.2010, on grasses,
Samastipur; 1 female, 28.x.2010, on grasses, Supaul
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 28.6,
Tegmina 21.0, Hind femur 13.85, Pronotum 6.0
Remarks: Has great camouflage potential and
thereby tough to spot in its habitat.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar.
Tribe: Poekilocerini Burmeister, 1838
3. Poekilocerus pictus (Fabricius, 1775)
Diagnostic characters: This species of Poekilocerus
can be distinguished from other species by its blueblack
ringed antennae with black and yellow pattern
beyond the basal third of sub-interupted transverse
yellow bands, pronotum impress-punctate, rounded
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
behind, the hind sulcus placed just behind the middle.
Material Examined: 1 female, 24.vi.2009, on
Calotropis procera, Banka.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 54.0,
Tegmina 33.2, Hind femur 20.9, Pronotum 4.0.
Remarks: The preferred food plant is Calotropis
procerca (Ait.) which favour sandy soil and semi-arid
conditions. The readiness to accept alternative food
plants has enabled Poekilocerus to survive in some
areas where Calotropis is scarce or even absent. This
is the most mobile member of the genus in which both
sexes especially the females have proportionately
longer wings.
Natural enemies: The praying mantis Mantis
religiosa is a predator and the dipterous parasite
Blaesoxipha sp. has been recorded to cause nearly
11% mortality of hoppers.
Distribution: Himachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh,
Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar.
Tribe: Chrotogonini Bolivar, 1904
4. Chrotogonus trachypterus (Blanchard, 1836)
Diagnostic characters: Body brown, rugose
and tuberculate; head short and broad; antennae
11-segmented; pronotum short, broad with small
tubercles; sternum yellowish; tegmina reaching near to
the tip of abdomen, covered with numerous prominent
nodules, wings nearly as long as the tegmen; hind
femur as long as the abdomen; hind tibia with seven
external and nine internal spines; abdomen brown
above, pale beneath, without darkish spots, but with
darkish tinge.
Material examined: 1 female, 23.vi.2009, on
grasses, Khagaria; 1 female, 16.vi.2009, on paddy,
Gaya; 2 females, 26.vi.2009, on arhar, Katihar; 1
female, 26.x.2010, on grasses, Samastipur; 1 female,
4.vi.2010, on grasses, Bettiah, Paschim Champaran.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 15.0,
Tegmina 5.2, Hind femur 6.8, Pronotum 3.25
Remarks: Body colour matches with the soil and
can be commonly spotted in ploughed fields and
roadside grasses.
Natural enemies: The hymenopterans Scelio
aegyptiacus Priesner and S. hieroglyphi Timb. were
recorded to parasitize the eggs by Ahmed et al.
(1973).
Distribution: Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Delhi,
Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204
3193

Acridoidea of Bihar
Kashmir, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Meghalaya,
Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, West
Bengal.
B. Family: Catantopidae Brunner, 1893
Subfamily: Oxyinae Brunner, 1893
5. Oxya japonica japonica (Thunberg, 1824)
Diagnostic characters: Antennae as long as or
slightly longer than head and pronotum together.
Lateral longitudinal ridges on ventral surface of
female sub genital plate without spines except at
apices. Ovipositor valves with short dents. Posterior
ventral basivalvular sclerite with a large spine on its
inner ventral margin, male cercus with sub-acute or
truncate apex.
Material examined: 1 male, 1 female, 13.vi.2009,
on paddy, Sarsaram, Rohtas; 2 females, 14.vi.2009, on
paddy, Aurangabad; 1 female, 16.vi.2009, on paddy,
Gaya; 26 females, 16.iv.2010, on wheat, Araria.
Morphometry: (Length in mm). Male: Body
11.7, Tegmina 19.9, Hind femur 10.7, Pronotum 7.8.
Female: Body 14.9, Tegmina 23.5, Hind femur 14.9,
Pronotum 9.0
Remarks: This sub-species is widely distributed in
India and Indo-Malayan region. It is a major pest of
paddy crop.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies are recorded.
Distribution: Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil
Nadu, Tripura, West Bengal, Gujarat, Bihar, Assam,
Manipur, Karnataka, Kerala, Punjab.
6. Oxya hyla hyla (Serville, 1831)
Diagnostic characters: Body of medium size,
antennae filiform, longer than, as long as, or shorter
than head and pronotum together; fastigium of vertex
short, without mid-longitudinal carinula, frontal
ridge sulcate, dorsum of pronotum slightly flattened,
crossed by three transverse sulci, median carina weak,
lateral carinae absent, metazona shorter than prozona,
posterior margin rounded or obtusely angular.
Ovipositor valves with long hook like dents posterior
ventral basivalvular sclerites with very small spinelets
on its inner ventral margin. Male circus with subacute
or truncate apex.
Material examined: 2 females, 24.x.2010, on
grasses, Gopalganj; 1 female, 24.vi.2009, on paddy,
Banka; 6 females, 20.xi.2010, on paddy, Araria; 1
female, 13.vi.2009, on paddy, Sarsaram, Rohtas.
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 13.8,
Tegmina 22.2, Hind femur 13.4, Pronotum 8.2.
Remarks: Reputed pest of paddy.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Punjab, Haryana, Bihar, Uttar
Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal,
Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur.
7. Oxya fuscovittata (Marschall, 1836)
Diagnostic characters: Posterior margin of female
subgenital plate almost straight and smooth. Male
supra anal plate with a tubercles on each side of median
apical process, cercus laterally much compressed and
of uniform width.
Material examined: 1 female, 20.xi.2010, on paddy,
Araria.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 14.7,
Tegmina 22.8, Hind femur 14.2, Pronotum 8.8.
Remarks: Pest of Paddy but also found in
grasslands.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, West
Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Punjab.
8. Oxya velox (Fabricius, 1787)
Diagnostic characters: Posterior ventral basivalvular
sclerites of ovipositor without any well defined spines
on its lower inner margin. Median pair of spines on
posterior margin of subgenital plate set wider apart.
Male circus conical with subacute apex.
Material examined: 2 females, 25.vi.2009, on
paddy saplings, Bhagalpur; 1 female, 25.x.2010, on
grasses, Motihari, Purba Champaran.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 13.7,
Tegmina 23.05, Hind femur 14.65, Pronotum 8.85.
Remarks: Commonly spotted in paddy saplings
rather than the crop.
Natural enemies: Red mite Eutrombidium trigonum
also observed parasitizing this species.
Distribution: Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Arunachal
Pradesh, Haryana.
Subfamily: Hemiacridinae Dirsh,1956
9. Hieroglyphus banian (Fabricius, 1798)
Diagnostic characters: Green including the
antennae. Pronotum smooth with four sulci, narrowly
lined with black, the first obsolete above, the second
on the sides and the last two continuous. Tegmina
3194
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

Acridoidea of Bihar
subhyaline, densely reticulated and greenish at the
base, with green nervures, wings as long as the
tegmina, greenish hyaline. The three sub-terminal
ventral segments with silky tufts of hair on the middle.
Hind tibiae blue with black tipped spines. Antennae
with the basal joint yellowish-green, the rest dark
green tipped with yellow.
Material examined: 1 female, 18.vi.2009, on paddy,
Jehanabad.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 49.0,
Tegmina 33.1, Hind femur 23.9, Pronotum 9.4.
Natural enemies: The authors found small reddish
mites possibly Trombidium sp. on adults but doubted
whether they caused any mortality. 15% of egg pods
dug up near Bangalore was parasitized by Scelio
hieroglyphi (Basa, 1953). Many vertebrates including
frogs, snakes, lizards, birds and mammals occasionally
feed on H. banian but none is regarded as an important
predator.
Remarks: The specimen was collected from
paddy.
Distribution: West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh,
Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Bihar, Orissa, Rajasthan,
Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh.
10. Spathosternum prasiniferum (Walker, 1871)
Diagnostic characters: Small, green, integument
finely rugose almost smooth. Head conical, fastigium
of vertex obtusely angular or parabolic. Filiform
antennae, frontal ridge narrow and sulcated. Two
broad blackish band or dark greenish-band running
behind the lower part of the eyes and below the lateral
carinae of the pronotum which is banded above by a
narrow pale yellow line and lateral carinae present,
Prosternal process large, strongly, antero–posteriorly
compressed, spathulated, inclined backwards.
Material examined: 2 females, 9.vii.2009, on
roadside grasses, Sitamarhi; 1 male, 1 female,
19.vi.2009, on paddy, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda; 2
females, 7.vii.2009, on grasses, Muzaffarpur; 2
females, 5.vii.2009, on grasses, Darbhanga; 2 females,
24.vi.2009, on paddy, Banka; 1 female, 23.vi.2009, on
grasses, Khagaria; 1 female, 16.vi.2009, on paddy,
Gaya; 1 female, 9.vi.2009, on paddy, Patna; 2 females,
29.x.2010, on grasses, Buxar; 1 female, 2males,
27.x.2010, on grasses, Hajipur, Vaishali; 3 males,
26.x.2010, on grasses, Samastipur; 1 male, 4.vi.2010,
on grasses, Bettiah, Pascim Champaran; 3 females,
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
28.x.2010, on grasses, Supaul; 1 female, 8.vi.2009, on
grasses, Begusarai; 4 females, 7.vi.2009, on grasses,
Luckeesarai.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 17.5,
Tegmina 12.8, Hind femur 8.65, Pronotum 2.85.
Female: Body 19.2, Tegmina 14.5, Hind femur 9.65,
Pronotum 3.0.
Remarks: This species is generally found on either
side of road, in pastures and in crop fields. It is a pest
of crop.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh,
Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Goa, Himachal Pradesh,
Jammu & Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu,
Uttar Pradesh.
Subfamily: Eyprepocnemidinae Brunner, 1893
11. Eyprepocnemis alacris (Serville, 1838)
Diagnostic characters: This is a typical species
of the genus. It can easily be separated from other
members of genus in having bluish grey hind tibia
with two whitish signs at the base and reddish apex and
tarsus, male cercus gradually narrowing towards apex
incurved and down curved. Fastigium of vertex round,
frontal ridge with characteristic dark brown markings
on lateral carinae, prosternal process cylindrical and
antero-posteriorly compressed. Elytra and wings fully
developed, elytra with numerous brown spots, bluish
grey hind tibiae.
Material examined: 1 female, 21.vi.2009, on maize,
Jamui; 1 female, 18.vi.2009, on bushes, Jehanabad.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body
40.25, Tegmina 30.8, Hind femur 20.35, Pronotum
6.55.
Remarks: This species is widely distributed in India
and adjacent countries. It is a polyphagous species.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies are recorded.
Distribution: Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Assam,
Manipur, Meghalaya, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar.
Subfamily: Calliptaminae Brunner, 1983
12. Acorypha glaucopsis (Walker, 1870)
Diagnostic characters: Body of medium size;
integument finely dotted, antennae filiform, shorter
than head and pronotum together, fastigium of vertex
moderately long, with longitudinal concavity and
strong lateral carinulae, frons vertical, frontal ridge
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204
3195

Acridoidea of Bihar
flat, Lower inner spur of hind tibia with the apex
simply recurved bearing sparse hairs, Pronotum with
metazona slightly longer than prozona; prosternal
process slightly transverse.
Material Examined: 6 males, 4 females, 13.vi.2009,
on hilly grasses of Chand Tan Shahid Pir, Sasaram,
Rohtas.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 16.0,
Tegmina 12.5, Hind femur 9.35, Pronotum 3.3.
Female: Body 24.0, Tegmina 20.7, Hind femur 14.4,
Pronotum 5.65.
Remarks: Very active and has exceptionally robust
hind femur.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu.
Subfamily: Romaleinae Roberts, 1941
13. Teratodes monticollis (Gray, 1832)
Diagnostic characters: Body of medium size;
antennae filiform, much shorter than head and
pronotum together, head broad, fastigium of vertex
rounded, frontal ridge sulcate, much widened between
antennae, pronotum much compressed, forming a high
crest, covering the head anteriorly and half of abdomen
posteriorly, never crossed by transverse sulci, lateral
carinae absent, prosternal process short, straight, apex
pointed, mesosternal interspace open, tegmina and
wings developed, tegmino-alar stridulatory mechanism
present, hind femur short, stout, tuberculate, lower
basal lobe about as long as upper one, hind tibia
without external apical spine.
Material examined: 1 female, 19.vi.2009, on dead
fallen leaves of forest, Rajgir, Nalanda.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female (Nymph):
Body 28.15, Hind femur 12.15, Pronotum 17.15.
Remarks: Exceptionally high, raised collar like
pronotum.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra,
Gujrat, Tamil Nadu.
Subfamily: Catantopinae Brunner, 1893
14. Catantops pinguis innotabilis (Walker, 1870)
Diagnostic characters: Reddish-brown, rather
stout. Frontal ridge finely punctured, slightly expanded
between the antennae, lateral carinae, distinct, slightly
divergent, antennae filiform, Pronotum closely
punctured, obtusely angulated behind, carina slight,
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
continuous, with the sulci well marked. Abdomen
with a short narrow dorsal stripe behind. Hind femora
stout, with two transverse black spots above, the first
extending into the externo-median area, the lower
outer area blackish-brown and the upper carinae
slightly serrated, hind tibiae and tarsi red, the former
with black tipped spines. Cerci of the male slightly
expanded at the tips. The species is easily identified
by the cercus which is up curved, more broadened apex
and projecting, upper apical angle is more projecting.
The species is also easily identified by the character of
the hind femur.
Material examined: 1 male, 26.vi.2009, Bushes
and wild vegetation, Bhagalpur.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 29.9,
Tegmina 24.1, Hind tibia 13.0, Pronotum 5.65.
Remarks: C. pinguis innotablis is widely distributed
in Indian subcontinent and is commonly found in
shrubs and herbs.
Natural enemies: In Thailand adults are affected by
the fungus Entomophthora grylli Fres. (Roffey 1965).
Red mite Eutrombidium trigonum also observed
parasitizing this species.
Distribution: Orissa, Goa, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil
Nadu, Bihar.
15. Xenocatantops karnyi (Kirby, 1910)
Diagnosis: Body of medium size, antennae slightly
longer or shorter than head and pronotum together,
fastigium of vertex with slightly raised carinulae
between eyes, median carina never strongly raised,
frontal ridge never projecting between antennae,
tegmina reaching beyond apex of abdomen, tegmina
and wings fully developed, pronotum at least slightly
constricted in middle, prosternal process conical.
Material examined: 1 female, 26.vi.2009, on arhar,
Katihar.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body
31.45, Tegmina 25.65, Hind femur 14.1, Pronotum
5.9.
Remarks: Differs from Catantops Schaum in
having constricted pronotum in the middle.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar.
Subfamily: Cyrtacanthacridinae Uvarov, 1923
16. Schistocerca gregaria Stal, 1873
Diagnostic characters: Body of large size,
3196
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

Acridoidea of Bihar
integument finely punctuate, antennae filiform, shorter
than head and pronotum together; fastigium of vertex
trapezoidal, with shallow longitudinal depression,
frontal ridge low, narrower than interocular distance,
pronotum constricted, crossed by three transverse sulci,
median carina low, sometimes indistinct in prozona,
lateral carinae absent, metazona about as long as
prozona, posterior margin rounded, prosternal process
cylindrical, moderately bent towards mesosternum
but not touching it, tegmina fully developed, apex
obliquely rounded, veinlets in the apical part more or
less perpendicular to the veins, hind femur with lower
basal lobe shorter than upper, external apical spine of
hind tibia absent.
Material Examined: 2 females, 1 male, 18.vi.2009,
on maize, Jehanabad; 2 females, 1 male, 16.iv.2010,
harvested wheat field, Araria.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 47.15,
Tegmina 38.5, Hind femur 21.15, Pronotum 9.0.
Female: Body 67.0, Tegmina 52.8, Hind femur 30.65,
Pronotum 13.4.
Remarks: Well reputed for gregaration in
superfamily Acridoidea.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar, Uttar Pradesh.
17. Chondacris rosea (De Geer, 1773)
Diagnostic characters: Body of large size,
integument strongly granulose, antennae filiform,
longer than head and pronotum together, fastigium of
vertex trapezoidal, frontal ridge slightly narrowed at
apex, Pronotum tectiform, crossed by three transverse
sulci, median carina raised, lateral carinae absent,
Prosternal process large, strongly bent towards
mesosternum, nearly touching it, mesosternal
interspace open, lobes rectangular. Supra anal plate
weakly trilobite, cercus compressed, apex slightly
attenuate and incurved, subgenital plate elongate,
acutely conical, Epiphallus bridge undivided, ancorae
absent, lophi broadly triangular. Ovipositor valves
comparatively slender, with curved apices, ventral
valve with angular lateral projection on outerside.
Material Examined: 1 male, 2 females, 17.iv.2010,
on arhar, Araria.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 67.7,
Tegmina 51.75, Hind femur 32.7, Pronotum 16.2.
Female: Body 91.3, Tegmina 69.45, Hind femur 43.85,
Pronotum 22.6.
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
Remarks: Sampled from arhar field.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Meghalaya, Bihar.
18. Cyrtacanthacris tatarica tatarica (Linnaeus,
1758)
Diagnostic characters: Body large, integument
slightly granulose and punctuate-dotted, antennae
filiform, about as long as head and pronotum
together, pronotum moderately tectiform and slightly
constricted, crossed by three transverse sulci, median
carina low, lateral carinae absent, prosternal process
large, widened in middle and gradually narrowing
towards subacute apex. Supra anal plate slightly
trilobite, with angular apical lobes, cercus compressed,
sub conical, apex subacute. Subgenital plate elongate,
acutely conical, female subgenital plate with posterior
margin having a conical projection medially.
Material Examined: 2 males, 2 females, 17.iv.2010,
on arhar, Araria.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 52.0,
Tegmina 41.25, Hind femur 25.75, Pronotum 9.7.
Female: Body 61.7, Tegmina 45.6, Hind femur 29.65,
Pronotum 12.5.
Remarks: Sampled from arhar field.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar.
Subfamily: Tropidopolinae Jacobson, 1902
19. Tristria pulvinata (Uvarov, 1921)
Diagnostic characters: Prosternal tubercle is
strongly bent backward, Lower surface very broad,
concave, trapezoidal with lateral margins raised and
hind margin lying on mesosternum. Elytra not reaching
the apex of abdomen, wings fully developed.
Material Examined: 4 females, 13.vi.2009, on
grasses, Sasaram, Rohtas; 1 male, 2 females, 29.vi.2009,
grasses around mango orchard, Madhubani; 2 females,
28.vi.2009, on paddy, Kishanganj.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 29.75,
Tegmina 18.55, Hind femur 15.25, Pronotum 4.35.
Female: Body 48.0, Tegmina 25.1, Hind femur 19.8,
Pronotum 5.5
Remarks: The species is graminivorous. It is a
grassland species and is found in many species of
grasses.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh,
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204
3197

Acridoidea of Bihar
Assam, Bihar, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu,
Uttar Pradesh.
20. Tropidopola longicornis (Fieber, 1853)
Diagnostic characters: Head conical, not longer
than the length of pronotum, prosternal process with
apical posterior margin excurved, tegmina and wings
fully developed reaching tip of abdomen, Pronotum
cylindrical or sub cylindrical, without lateral carinae,
fastigium of vertex at most as long as longest diameter
of eye.
Material Examined: 1 male, 10.vii.2009, on paddy,
Siwan.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 51.35,
Tegmina 37.85, Hind femur 18.35, Pronotum 7.0.
Remarks: Collected from paddy field.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh.
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
C. Family: Acrididae Latreille, 1802
Subfamily: Acridinae Latreille, 1802
21. Acrida exaltata (Walker, 1859)
Diagnostic characters: Head conically ascending.
Fastigium broad, laminate and truncate at apex.
Transverse sulcus of pronotum present about the middle
of pronotal disc. Male subgenital plate comparatively
long. Tegmina a little produced beyond the hind knee
and wings slightly shorter than tegmina.
Materials examined: 2 females, 3 males,
26.vi.2009, on paddy, Katihar; 1 female, 27.vi.2009,
on paddy, Purnia; 2 females, 1 male, 4.vii.2009, on
underlying grasses in vegetable field, Saharsa; 2
females, 7.vii.2009, on grasses, Muzaffarpur; 1 male,
10.vii.2009, on paddy, Siwan; 4 males, 24.vi.2009, on
paddy, Banka; 1 male, 4.vi.2010, on grasses, Bettiah,
Pascim Champaran; 1 female, 1 male, 28.x.2010,
on grasses, Supaul; 1 female, 29.x.2010, on grasses,
Buxar; 2 females, 2 males, 9.vi.2009, on paddy, Patna;
1 male, 26.x.2010, on grasses, Samastipur; 1 female,
8.vi.2009, on grasses, Begusarai; 1 female, 6.vi.2010,
on paddy, Ara, Bhojpur; 6 females, 5.vi.2010, on
paddy, Madhepura.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 52.8,
Tegmina 44.8, Hind femur 31.4, Pronotum 6.8.
Female: Body 48.25, Tegmina 30.0, Hind femur 24.55,
Pronotum 8.2
Remarks: This species is widely distributed
throughout plains and hilly regions of Indian subcontinent.
It is abundantly found on grasses and paddy
fields.
Natural enemies: This species was found to be
parasitized by Eutrombidium trigonum.
Distribution: Very common and known from many
localities in India. Sikkim, Kashmir, Himalayas,
Assam, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar.
22. Acrida gigantea (Herbst, 1794)
Diagnostic characters: Head conically ascending.
Fastigium broad, laminate and truncate at apex.
Transverse sulcus of pronotum present about the
middle of pronotal disc. Male subgenital plate
comparatively long. Tegmina a little produced beyond
the hind knee and wings slightly shorter than tegmina.
Lateral carinae with black inner margins.
Material examined: 2 males, 10.vii.2009, on paddy,
Siwan; 1 male, 1 female, 5.vii.2009, on grasses,
Darbhanga; 2 females, 19.vi.2009, on paddy, Rajgir,
Nalanda; 1 female, 4.vii.2009, on underlying grasses
in vegetable field, Saharsa; 1 female, 15.vi.2009, on
paddy, Gaya; 1 male, 11.vi.2009, on paddy, Bhabua,
Kaimur; 1 female, 24.x.2010, on grasses, Gopalganj;
1 female,1 male, 7.vii.2009, on grasses, Muzaffarpur;
2 females, 13.vi.2009, on paddy, Sasaram, Rohtas; 1
male, 26.vi.2009, on paddy, Katihar; 1 male, 9.vi.2009,
on paddy, Patna; 1 male, 8.vi.2009, on grasses,
Begusarai; 1 male, 23.x.2010, on wheat, Chhapra,
Saran.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 31.45,
Tegmina 22.0, Hind femur 17.3, Pronotum 4.3.
Female: Body 50.1, Tegmina 45.65, Hind femur 31.4,
Pronotum 9.65.
Remarks: Usually found in paddy and grasses and
produces very striking stridulatory sound.
Natural enemies: This species was found to be
parasitized by Eutrombidium trigonum.
Distribution: Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab,
Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Jharkhand,
Uttarakhand.
23. Phlaeoba infumata Brunner, 1893
Diagnostic characters: Antennae ensiform. Lateral
carinae of pronotum straight, disc of pronotum rugose.
Wings fusco-hyaline, infumated towards the apex.
Subgenital plate of male acute.
Material examined: 1 male, 11.vi.2009, on dead
vegetation, Bhabua, Kaimur; 1 female, 21.vi.2009, on
3198
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

Acridoidea of Bihar
paddy, Jamui.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 24.65,
Tegmina 17.55, Hind femur 12.05, Pronotum 3.2.
Female: Body 32.1, Tegmina 23.5, Hind femur 16.4,
Pronotum 5.0.
Remarks: This species occur in sugarcane fields.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies have been
recorded.
Distribution: Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar,
Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Tamil Nadu,
Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal.
24. Phlaeoba panteli (Bolivar, 1902)
Diagnostic characters: Body slender and of
moderate size, antennae ensiform, median carinula
present, frons oblique, frontal ridge sulcate, median
carina excised by anterior and posterior sulcus each,
hind wings hyaline, lateral carinae linear.
Material examined: 1 female, 22.vi.2009, on dead
vegetation, Munger.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 29.6,
Tegmina 24.0, Hind femur 16.5, Pronotum 5.6
Remarks: Usually spotted on dead and decaying
plant material lying on ground.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies have been
recorded.
Distribution: Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Punjab.
Subfamily: Oedipodinae Walker, 1870
25. Trilophidia annulata (Thunberg, 1815)
Diagnostic characters: Small insect, antennae
filiform with black yellow bands, eyes somewhat
bulging, pronotum saddle shaped, median carina
forming tooth like projections in prozona, apex of
tegmina truncated, hind femur with a yellow band just
above the basal lobe.
Material examined: 2 females, 16.vi.2009, on
sugarcane, Gaya.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 22.8,
Tegmina 18.6, Hind femur 9.8, Pronotum 3.85.
Remarks: Commonly found in sugarcane and
paddy.
Natural enemies: Red mite Eutrombidium trigonum
was observed parasitizing this species.
Distribution: Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Bihar,
Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Himachal, Arunachal
Pradesh, Tripura, Meghalaya,
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
26. Aiolopus simulatrix (Walker, 1870)
Diagnostic characters: It is popularly known as
Sudan Plague locust and is a serious pest of grain and
many other crops. The species is variable in general
coloration, size, relative length of tegmina and width
of hind femur. It can easily be distinguished by its
broad hind femur which is longer than hind tibia and
by the form of frontal ridge and pronotum.
Material examined: 3 females, 2 males, 11.vi.2009,
on paddy, Bhabua, Kaimur; 6 females, 15.vi.2009,
on paddy, Gaya; 3 females, 2 males, 27.vi.2009, on
paddy, Purnia; 3 females, 4 males, 21.vi.2009, on
paddy, Jamui; 1 female, 2 males, 22.vi.2009, on paddy,
Munger; 2 males, 23.vi.2009, on paddy, Khagaria; 1
female, 6.vi.2010, on paddy, Ara, Bhojpur; 4 males,
23.x.2010, on wheat, Chhapra, Saran ; 2 females, 2
males, 28.vi.2009, on paddy, Kishanganj.
Mophometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 11.2–
11.7, Pronotum 6.4–7.1, Tegmina 17.3–17.7 Hind
femur 7.3–7.8. Female: Body 13.3–13.9, Pronotum
7.1–8.3, Tegmina –22.3–23.1, Hind Femur 11.3 –
11.7.
Remarks: A common pest of agricultural crops.
Observed in groundnut, paddy, cholam, ragi and
brinjal fields as well as grasslands.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Andaman & Nikobar Islands, Bihar,
Delhi, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka,
Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil
Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal.
27. Aiolopus thalassinus thalassinus (Fabricius,
1781)
Diagnostic characters: Medium sized insect,
tegmina and wings fully developed, head acutely
conical, antennae filiform, as long as or longer than head
and pronotum together, fastigium of vertex elongateangular,
slightly concave, with well developed lateral
carinulae, frons oblique; frontal ridge flat, pronotum
slightly tectiform and slightly constricted in prozona,
median carina weak, medial area of tegmen with
intercalary vein well developed and finely serrated,
hind femur slender, hind tibia with inner pair of spines
longer than external one, external apical spine absent,
arolium of small size, Frontal ridge of uniform width
with nearly parallel margins, foveolae shorter, hind
tibia coloured as in tumulus but with a dark ring before
the middle and without the bluish median part.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204
3199

Acridoidea of Bihar
Material examined: 1 female, 25.x.2010, on wheat,
Motihari, Purba Champaran; 3 males, 23.x.2010, on
wheat, Chhapra, Saran.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 25.8,
Tegmina 20.05, Hind femur 11.85, Pronotum 3.75.
Female: Body 33.1, Tegmina 26.75, Hind femur 16.2,
Pronotum 5.15.
Remarks: Commonly found in vegetable fields of
brinjal, lady finger, tomato and also in paddy fields.
Natural enemies: Red mite identified as
Eutrombidium trigonum was found to infect the
insect.
Distribution: West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh,
Uttarakhand, Jharkhand, Haryana, Punjab.
28. Aiolopus thalassinus tamulus (Fabricius, 1798)
Diagnostic characters: Coloured in combination
of black and green. Frontal ridge gradually tapered
towards the fastigium, foveolae longer, hind tibia
in the basal third with a straw-coloured band, in the
median part usually bluish, the apical part reddish.
Material examined: 2 males, 1 female, 21.vi.2009,
on paddy, Jamui; 2 females, 23.vi.2009, on paddy,
Khagaria; 1 male, 22.vi.2009, on paddy, Munger; 2
females, 13.vi.2009, on paddy, Sasaram, Rohtas; 4
females, 6.vi.2010, on paddy, Ara, Bhojpur.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: 24.4, Tegmina
18.2, Hind femur 8.2, Pronotum 3.4. Female: 33.5,
Tegmina 26.9, Hind femur 15.2, Pronotum 4.75.
Remarks: Common in paddy fields but may also
be encountered in wheat, maize, and grassland areas
surrounding the fields.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand,
Jharkhand, Haryana, West Bengal.
29. Chloebora grossa (Saussure, 1884)
Diagnostic characters: Large sized insect with
nearly round eyes, Median carina well developed
but lateral carinae show slight presence in metazona,
tegmina membranous at apical one third part, hind
wing membranous and bears a complete fascia midway,
hind tibia is markedly shorter than femur.
Material examined: 1 male, 1 female, 13.vi.2009,
on grasses of Chand Tan Shahid Pir, Sasaram, Rohtas
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 35.6,
Tegmina 27.45, Hind femur 14.2, Pronotum 6.55.
Female: Body 51.4, Tegmina 39.5, Hind femur 22.5,
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
Pronotum 9.4.
Remarks: It shows its presence in forest areas in
and around bushes and exhibits good camouflage with
the surrounding rocks.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies have been
recorded.
Distribution: Bihar, Tamil Nadu.
30. Acrotylus insubricus (Scopoli, 1786)
Diagnostic characters: Body of medium size,
pronotum saddle shaped and shorter than width, eyes
somewhat bulging, tegmina with infuscated spots
beyond middle, hind wings with lunate incomplete
fascia.
Material examined: 1 female, 9.vii.2009, on paddy,
Sitamarhi.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 26.0,
Tegmina 20.35, Hind femur 7.7. Pronotum 2.8.
Remarks: It has been found damaging rice and
millet in India.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies have been
recorded.
Distribution: Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Goa,
Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh.
31. Oedaleus senegalensis (Krauss, 1877)
Diagnostic characters: A characteristic X mark on
the Pronotum, which is broadly rounded posteriorly.
Hind wing, yellow basally with complete dark fascia.
Material examined: 1 male, 1 female, 20.vi.2009,
on paddy, Nawada.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 20.45,
Tegmina 15.7, Hind femur 10.2, Pronotum 3.4.
Female: Body 25.8, Tegmina 19.6, Hind femur 13.2,
Pronotum 4.25.
Remarks: Widely distributed in Indian subcontinent.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Himachal
Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Madhya
Pradesh, Meghalaya, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu,
Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal.
32. Oedipoda miniata (Pallas, 1771)
Diagnostic characters: Wings mostly rugose so
the dark band often pale brown, strongly bowed
reaching upto IXth or Xth section of anal fan and not
touching hind margin (Harz 1975). Integument often
3200
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

Acridoidea of Bihar
less rugose and less callous. Facial carinula mostly
without projections. Dark fasciae of wings extending
towards the base by one longitudinal band into the
anterior field.
Material examined: 1 female, 14.vi.2009, on
arhar, Aurangabad; 2 females, 20.vi.2009, on maize,
Nawada; 2 females, 21.vi.2009, on sugarcane, Jamui.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body
45.55, Tegmina, 36.0, Hind femur, 20.7, Pronotum
9.6.
Remarks: This species can be easily distinguished
from O. coerulescens (Linnaeus, 1758) because its
wings are basally red.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies recorded.
Distribution: Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Punjab,
Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan.
33. Locusta migratoria (Linnaeus, 1758)
Diagnostic characters: It occurs in green and
brown form in the solitary phase. The species can
easily be identified from other Locusts by the absence
of prosternal process, the slight yellow tinting of the
wings and the black anal veins are distinctive features
of the species.
Material examined: 1 male, 11.vi.2009, on arhar,
Bhabua, Kaimur; 1male, 2 females, 27.vi.2009,
on paddy, Araria; 2 females, 27.vi.2009, on paddy,
Purnia.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 44.85,
Tegmina 37.65, Hind femur 20.15, Pronotum 7.77.
Female: Body 60.4, Tegmina 48.8, Hind femur 25.6,
Pronotum 10.0.
Remarks: Though quite strict graminivorous and
capable of causing considerable damage to grain crops,
very many plants belonging to different families have
been recorded as food.
Natural enemies: It is sometimes heavily infested
with mites.
Distribution: Assam, Bengal, Kashmir, South
India, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, West
Bengal, Maharashtra.
Subfamily: Truxalinae Walker, 1870
34. Truxalis nasuta (Linnaeus, 1758)
Diagnostic characters: The species can easily be
identified by its pronotum sellate, hind wing strongly
dark brown tessellate, basally crimson in female.
Material Examined: 1 female, 21.vi.2009, on
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
paddy, Jamui.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 67,
Tegmina 61, Pronotum 7, Hind femur 45.
Remarks: Graminivorous. It is usually found in old
farmland. Also found in sparse gramineous vegetation
and some occur even in cultivated fields.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies have been
recorded.
Distribution: Rajasthan, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh,
Punjab.
Subfamily: Gomphocerinae Jacobson & Blanki,
1902
35. Chorthippus indus (Uvarov, 1942)
Diagnostic characters: Colour variable, green,
testacious or brown. Antennae sub depressed, longer
than the head and pronotum together. Pronotum with
transverse sulcus placed about the middle, the head
not carinated above, the pronotum strongly tricarinate,
the median carina slightly raised, the lateral carinae
slightly incurved before the middle and then diverging.
Tegmina longer than abdomen in a male usually shorter
in the female, sometimes with longitudinal yellow
scapular lines. Wings hyaline with brown nervures.
Pectus and front leg pilose, legs not spotted, hind tibia
with twelve small spines, decreasing in size towards
the base. Subgenital plate in the male is curved,
pubescent, valves of the ovipositor unarmed.
Material examined: 1 male, 29.vi.2009, on grasses
of vegetable field, Madhubani.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 17.15,
Tegmina 11.7, Hind femur 10.6, Pronotum 3.7.
Remarks: It is a large species other than those
already recorded. It may well become minor pests at
times.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies have been
recorded.
Distribution: Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh,
Punjab.
36. Leva indica (I. Bolivar, 1902)
Diagnostic characters: Testacious varied with
brown faveolae of the vertex subquadrate, filled up
with black frontal carina impress punctuate, sulcate at
the ocellus for a large space in the male, a short space
in the female. Antennae filiform, slightly depressed.
Pronotum pale above. Tegmina subhyaline with a
yellow spacular line and brown discoid spots. Hind
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204
3201

Acridoidea of Bihar
femora with four brown bands, often obsolete on the
outer side.
Material examined: 1 female, 4.vii.2009, on paddy,
Saharsa.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Female: Body 17.5,
Tegmina 12.95, Hind femur 9.4, Pronotum 2.75.
Remarks: It is very small species. Lateral carinae
of pronotum parallel in prozona and strongly divergent
in metazona which is the most characteristic feature of
the species. Abundantly found on grasses and paddy
crops.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies are recorded.
Distribution: West Bengal, Delhi, Tamil Nadu,
Tripura, Uttar Pradesh.
37. Leionotacris bolivari (Uvarov, 1921)
Diagnostic characters: Frontal ridge convex;
fastigial foveolae elongate rhomboidal, dorsum of
head and pronotum with a pale stripe extending from
anterior margin of fastigium to posterior margin of
pronotum with posterior transverse sulcus placed in the
middle, tegmina perfectly developed at least reaching
tip of hind femur with three dark spots on radial area.
Material examined: 1 female, 14.vi.2009, on lady
finger, Aurangabad.
Morphometry: (length in mm). Male: Body 10.8,
Pronotum 5.7, Tegmina 15.1, Hind Femur 10.7.
Remarks: This species has been recorded as a
minor pest on the foliage of teak in India.
Natural enemies: No natural enemies have been
recorded.
Distribution: West Bengal, Assam, Bihar, Himachal
Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Sikkim,
Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh.
REFERENCES
Agarwala, S.B.D. (1952). A comparative study of the ovipositor
in the Acrididae - I. Indian Journal of Entomology, I 13:
147–181.
Agarwala, S.B.D. (1952). A comparative study of the ovipositor
in the Acrididae - I. Indian Journal of Entomology, II 14:
61–75.
Bhowmik, H.K. (1985). Outline of distribution with an index-
Catalogue of Indian grasshoppers (Orth.: Acrididae). Part
I. Acridinae, Truxalinae, Gomphocerinae and Oedipodinae.
Records of Zoological Survey of India Miscellaneous
Publication Occasional Paper 78: 1–51.
Dey, A. & A.K. Hazra (2003). Diversity and distribution of
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
grasshopper fauna of Greater Kolkata with notes on their
ecology. Memoirs 19(3): 1–118.
Dirsh, V.M. (1965). The African Genera of Acridoidea. Anti-
Locust Research Centre and Cambridge University Press,
London, 579pp.
Dirsh, V.M. (1975). Classification of Acridomorphoid Insects.
Faringdon, Oxon, E.W. Classey, 171pp.
Hazra, A.K., S.K. Tandon, M.S. Shishodia, A. Dey & S.K.
Mandal (1993). Insecta: Orthoptera: Acridoidea. In: Fauna
of West Bengal, State Fauna Series 3(4): 287–354.
Julka, J.M., S.K. Tandon, P. Halder & M.S. Shishodia (1982).
Ecological observation on grasshoppers (Orthoptera:
Acridoidea) at Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India. Oriental
Insects 16: 63–75.
Kirby, W.F. (1914). The Fauna of British India, Including
Ceylon and Burma. Orthoptera (Acrididae). Taylor and
Francis, London, ix+276pp.
Kumar, P. & C.A. Viraktamath (1991a). Illustrated keys
for identification of common species of short-horned
grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acridodea) of Karnataka and
short notes on their ecology and behaviour. Hexapoda 3(1–
2): 53–70.
Kumar, P. & C.A. Viraktamath (1991b). Taxonomic
significance of the male genitalia (Epiphallus) of some
species of Short-horned Grasshoppers (Orthoptera:
Acridoidea). Journal of the Bombay Natural History
Society 88(2): 200–209.
Nayeem, M.R. & M.K. Usmani (2011). Diversity of Acridoidea
(Orthoptera) from southern and southwestern region of
Bihar, India. Folia Heyrovskyana 19(1–4): 5–12.
Nayeem, M.R. & M.K. Usmani (2012). Taxonomy and Field
Observations of Grasshopper and Locust Fauna (Orthoptera:
Acridoidea) of Jharkhand, India. Munis Entomology &
Zoology 7(1): 391–417.
Roonwal, M.L. (1956). Bibliographica Acrididorum. Records
of Indian Museum 56: 1–611.
Shishodia, M.S. (1987). Orthoptera Fauna of Assam. State
Fauna Series (1): 91-102.
Shishodia, M.S. (1997). Orthoptera Fauna of Delhi. State
Fauna Series: Zoological Survey of India 173–176pp.
Shishodia, M.S. (1999). Orthoptera fauna of Patalkot,
chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh, India. Records of Zoological
Survey of India 97 (4): 33–43.
Shishodia, M.S., K. Chandra & S.K. Gupta (2010). An
annotated Checklist of Orthoptera (Insecta) from India.
Records of Zoological Survey of India, Occasional Paper
No. 314: 1–366.
Tandon, S.K. (1975). On the genus Chondracris Uvarov (Insecta:
Orthoptera: Acridoidea: Acrididae: Cyrtacanthacridinae)
in India. Dr. B.S. Chauhan Commemoration Volume 395–
402.
Tandon, S.K. (1976). A Check-list of the Acridoidea
(Orthoptera) of India Part I Acrididae. Records of Zoological
Survey of India. Occasional Paper No. 3: 1–48.
Tandon, S.K. & P. Khera (1978). Ecology and distribution
of grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acridoidea) in Arunachal
3202
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

Acridoidea of Bihar
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
Key to tribes of the family Pyrgomorphidae Brunner, 1874
1 Body never depressed; prosternum without reflexed collar-like anterior margin....................................................2
Body depressed; pronotum with reflexed collar-like anterior margin; tegmina with small nodules on main veins;
antennae cylindrical ....................................................................................................... Chrotogonini Bolivar,1904
2 Body small, never large and heavy; tegmina and hind wing usually fully developed.............................................3
Body large and heavy; antennae filiform with basal segments as long as wide; pronotum with metazona convex,
much widened distally, posterior margin somewhat rounded; tegmina and hind wing well developed.....................
................................................................................................................................ Poekilocerini Burmeister, 1840
3 Tegmina if fully developed, never tapered and pointed; epiphallus bridge-shaped; apical part of spermatheca
S-shaped ................................................................................................................. Pyrgomorphini Brunner, 1874
Tegmina usually fully developed and usually very tapered and pointed; epiphallus anchor-shaped; apical part of
spermatheca with two diverticula ...............……………………………………………. Atractomorphini Bolivar, 1884
Key to subfamilies of the family Catantopidae Brunner, 1893
1 Lower knee lobe of hind femur never spined; valves of ovipositor never serrate or spined; hind tibia never
flattened .....................................................................………………………………………………………………….2
Lower knee lobe of hind femur spined; valves of ovipositor serrate or spined; hind tibia flattened …… ………......
…………………………………………………………………………………..............………….Oxyinae Brunner, 1893
2 Hind femur never much robust, usually reaching beyond apex of abdomen; epiphallus bridge shaped, ancorae
usually curved, articulated with bridge, lophi present; male circus never toothed apically ….............................…3
Hind femur much robust, never reaching beyond apex of abdomen; epiphallus disc shaped, ancorae finger
shaped, articulated in the middle of the disc, lophi absent; male circus large, strong, curved and toothed apically
....................................................................................................................................Calliptaminae Brunner, 1893
3 Radial area of tegmen without transverse stridulatory veinlets; valves of aedeagus flexure; arolium of variable
size ……………………………………………….......................................................................................………… 4
Radial area of tegmen with a series of regular, parallel, thickened, transverse stridulatory veinlets; valves of
aedeagus divided or connected by small or indistinct flexure; arolium large…….....… Hemiacridinae Dirsh, 1956
4 Hind femur with lower basal lobe shorter than upper one; tegmino-alar stridulatory mechanism absent ..............5
Hind femur with lower basal lobe as long as upper one; tegmino-alar stridulatory mechanism present …..........…
……………………………………………………………………………………….....……... Romaleinae Roberts, 1941
5 Mesosternal interspace open; hind femur with dorsal carina finely denticulate, sometimes smooth; external
apical spine of hind tibia usually absent……………………………………………..................……….……………… 6
Mesosternal interspace closed; hind femur with dorsal carina smooth; external apical spine of hind tibia present
……………………………………………………………..................… ……… …..…. Tropidopolinae Jacobson, 1902
6 Mesosternal lobes rounded; ancorae well developed and curved; pronotum with median carina never raised;
spermatheca with apical diverticulum moderately long………………………………………………………………… 7
Mesosternal lobes rectangular; ancorae small or indistinct; pronotum with median carina slightly raised;
spermatheca with apical diverticulum very long and slender……….………….. Cyrtacanthacridinae Uvarov, 1923
7 Pronotum with lateral carinae linear; male circus strongly compressed, apex down curved ................…...............
...... .............………………………………………………………………………..…Eyprepocnemidinae Brunner, 1893
Pronotum without lateral carinae, if present, never linear; male circus variable, never strongly compressed, apex
normal ……………………………………………………………………………………......Catantopinae Brunner, 1893
Pradesh, India and impact of human activities on their
ecology and distribution. Memoirs of the School of
Entomology 6: 73–92.
Usmani, M.K. (2006). Taxonomic significance of female
subgenital plate in some Indian grasshoppers (Orthoptera :
Acridoidea). Sebha University Journal 4(1): 51–66.
Usmani, M.K. & S.A. Shafee (1980). Female genitalia in some
India species of Pyrgomorphinae (Orthoptera : Acrididae).
Journal of Entomological Research (4): 41–44.
Usmani, M.K. & S.A. Shafee (1982). Taxonomic significance
of ovipositor in some Indian grasshoppers (Orthoptera:
Acrididae). Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society
79(3): 576–580.
Usmani, M.K. & S.A. Shafee (1983). A new genus and two
new species of the subfamily Acridinae (Orthoptera:
Acrididae) from India. Bulletin of Swiss Entomological
Society 56: 401–403.
Usmani, M.K. & S.A. Shafee (1984). A new tribe of Oxyinae
(Orthoptera: Acrididae). Bulletin of Swiss Entomological
Society 57: 295–296.
Usmani, M.K. & S.A. Shafee (1985a). A new species
of the genus Ramakrishnaia I. Bolivar (Orthoptera :
Pyrgomorhidae) from India. International Journal of
Entomology 27(3): 204–207.
Usmani, M.K. & S.A. Shafee (1985b). A revision of the Indian
species of Oxya (Oxyinae: Acrididae). Oriental Insects 19:
311–322.
Usmani, M.K. & S.A. Shafee (1990). Classification of Indian
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204
3203

Acridoidea of Bihar
M.K. Usmani & M.R. Nayeem
Key to subfamilies of Acrididae Latreille, 1802
1 Stridulatory serration on inner side of hind femur absent………………........................................………………... 2
Stridulatory serration on inner side of hind femur present………………....................................……...………...... 3
2 Body usually slender; frons oblique; medial area of tegmen usually without intercalary vein, if present, never
serrated in both sexes…………..................................................….............................….. Acridinae Latreille, 1802
Body rather sturdy; frons usually vertical; medial area of tegmen with intercalary vein usually serrated …….…
……………........................................…........................................… …………………. Oedipodinae Scudder, 1875
3 Body very slender; antennae flattened, ensiform; eyes nearer to apex of head than to its base; hind femur long
and narrow, its stridulatory file represented by closely set rigid tubercles and articulated bristles ………… ………
…........................................…........................................…........................................……. Truxalinae Walker, 1870
Body moderately slender; antennae normally filiform but tend to be compressed and ensiform in species with
elongated body; eyes never nearer to apex of head than to its base; hind femur never extremely narrow, its
stridulatory file with articulated pegs……………….....………………………………. Gomphocerinae Hebard, 1935
Acrididae (Orthoptera: Acridoidea). Indian Journal of Systematic Entomology
7(2) : 89–102.
Uvarov, B.P. (1921). Notes on Orthoptera in the British Museum. I. The group
Euprepocnemini. Transactions of Entomological Society of London 106–144.
Uvarov, B.P. (1924). A revision of the old world Cyrtacanthacrini, Annual Magazine
of Natural History 13(9): 1–19.
Uvarov, B.P. (1927). Distributional records of Indian Acrididae. Records of Indian
Museum 29: 233–239.
Uvarov, B.P. (1942). Differentiating characters of Oedipodinae and Acridinae.
Transactions of American Entomological Society 67: 303–361.
Uvarov, B.P. (1966). Grasshoppers and Locusts. A Hand book of General Acridology.
Cambridge, XI + 481pp.
Author Details: Dr. Mo h d. Ka m i l Us m a n i presently
engaged as Associate Professor at Department
of Zoology, A.M.U., Aligarh. Ph.D. (1982) from
the same institution and Post-graduate Diploma
in Applied Insect Taxonomy & Biological Control
(1985) from Cardiff University, Cardiff, U.K. Has
teaching experience of 28 years and research
experience of 34 years and has published
about 63 research papers and three books. Has
successfully completed three major research
projects in India as well as abroad.
Md. Ra s h i d Na y e e m presently engaged as
JRF on Major Project of MoEF and Research
Scholar at Department of Zoology, A.M.U.,
Aligarh. Obtained M.Sc. (2008) degree from the
same Institution. Worked as Junior Research
Fellow for two years and Senior Research
Fellow for one year on DST sponsored Major
Research Project. Ten research papers have
been published and three are accepted for
publication.
3204
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3190–3204

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(13): 3205–3214
Western Ghats
Special Series
Diversity of rhacophorids (Amphibia: Anura) in
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve, Western Ghats, Kerala, India
K.M. Jobin 1 & P.O. Nameer 2
1,2
Department of Wildlife Sciences, College of Forestry, Kerala Agricultural University (KAU), Vellanikkara, Kerala 680656, India
Email: 1 jobinmathew00@gmail.com, 2 nameerpo@gmail.com (corresponding author)
Abstract: A study on the rhacophorids of Parambikulam Tiger
Reserve was conducted from April to July 2011. Eleven species
of rhacophorids in four genera—Rhacophorus (three species),
Polypedates (one species), Pseudophilautus (one species) and
Raorchestes (six species)—were recorded. Distribution, natural
history and biological information is provided including some
recommendations for changes in the IUCN conservation status
of the rhacophorids of Western Ghats have been proposed in
the paper.
Keywords: IUCN Red Listing, Kerala, Parambikulam Tiger
Reserve, Rhacophoridae, Western Ghats.
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Sanjay Molur
Manuscript details:
Ms # o3081
Received 25 January 2012
Final received 28 July 2012
Finally accepted 14 August 2012
Citation: Jobin, K.M. & P.O. Nameer (2012). Diversity of rhacophorids
(Amphibia: Anura) in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve, Western Ghats, Kerala,
India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(13): 3205–3214.
Copyright: © K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer 2012. Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article
in any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by
providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank the Kerala State Forest
Department, particularly the Chief Wildlife Warden for granting permission
(study permit No. WL 12-7972/2010) to study the amphibians at PKTR.
We thank the Field Director, PKTR, the Wildlife Warden, the Assistant
Wildlife Wardens, the Wildlife Asst. and other staff of PTR for making
necessary arrangements on the logistics at PTR. We also thank Dr. Anil
Zachariah and Sandeep Das for confirming the identification of the frogs,
Mr. Sreenivasan, the forest watcher at the PKTR for accompanying us
in the field, Sreehari R., Kiran Thomas, Maya T. Joy, Lakshmi, A. Nithin,
S. Sachin, K. Aravind for their support, V.S. Sreehari for helping with the
preparation of the map of PKTR. The Associate Dean of the College of
Forestry is thanked for the encouragement and the facilities during the
study. We also would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for offering
very valuable comments.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:450A0968-536A-4E4A-9F60-
AF0DB8415D01
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
Western Ghats, one of the 34 biodiversity hotspots
of the World (Myers et al. 2000; Conservation
International 2005) is exceptionally rich in amphibian
diversity. During the last one and half decades there
has been an outburst of publications, including the
description of several new species to science from the
family Rhacophoridae (Das & Ravichandran 1998;
Vasudevan & Dutta 2000; Bossuyt 2002; Kuramoto &
Joshy 2003; Biju & Bossuyt 2005a,b; Biju & Bossuyt
2006a; Das & Dutta 2006; Gururaja et al. 2007; Biju &
Bossuyt 2009; Biju et al. 2010; Zachariah et al. 2011a,b).
About 68 species of frogs were described from India in
the last one decade of which 32 species, nearly 50%,
were members of the family Rhacophoridae (Dinesh et
al. 2011). The rhacophorids are characterised by their
varied microhabitat preferences ranging from ground
litter (Biju et al. 2010), bushes and reeds (Gururaja
et al. 2007) to high up in the forest canopy (Biju &
Bossuyt 2005a). The rhacophorids also display
varying breeding biology (Patil & Kanamadi 1997;
Krishnamurthy et al. 2002; Biju 2003; Gururaja &
Ramachandra 2006). Very little is known about the
amphibians of Parambikulam Tiger Reserve (PKTR)
in general and rhacophorids in particular hence the
present study. The earlier studies on the amphibians
of PKTR include Rao (1937), Satyamurthi (1967) and
Radhakrishnan (1996).
The publication of this article is supported by the Critical Ecosystem
Partnership Fund (CEPF) -- a joint initiative of l’Agence Française de
Développement, Conservation International, the Global Environment
Facility, the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and
the World Bank.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214 3205

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
Study Area
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve (PKTR) is situated
in Palghat District, Kerala, India, within the Anamalai
Hills and borders Nelliyampathy Hills (76 0 35’–
76 0 50’E & 10 0 20’–10 0 26’N). The total extent of
the Tiger Reserve is 643.66km 2 , with a core zone of
390.89km 2 and buffer zone of 252.77km 2 (Kaler 2011).
The major vegetation types in the core zone are IA/
C4 west coast tropical evergreen forests, 2A/C2 west
coast tropical semievergreen forests, 3B/C2 southern
moist mixed deciduous forests, 5A/C3 southern dry
mixed deciduous forests, 2/E3 moist bamboo brakes,
8A/C1/E1 reed brakes and IIA/C1 southern montane
wet temperate forests (sholas). The altitude of the
PKTR ranges from 300–1438 m (Kaler 2011). Major
peaks are Karimala (1438m), Pandaravarai (1290m),
Vengoli (1120m) and Puliyarapadam (1010m). PKTR
has three man-made reservoirs namely Parambikulam,
Thunacadavu and Peruvaripallam whose cumulative
waterspread area is 20.66km 2 . The PKTR forms the
catchment of Chalakkudy River. Administratively,
PKTR is divided into four ranges, the Karimala
Range, Orukomban Range, Parambikulam Range and
Sungam Range (Fig. 1). The present study is primarily
confined to the core zone of PKTR.
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
Methods
Visual encounter surveys were carried out at
Parambikulam TR from April–July 2011. Efforts
were made to cover all the representative habitats of
PKTR. The frogs were searched for in the suitable
microhabitats and two specimens per species were
collected. Standard morphological measurements
were taken for all specimens as per Bossuyt & Dubois
(2001). These include, snout vent length (SVL), head
width (HW), head length (HL), maximum distance
between upper eye lid (IUE), maximum width of
upper eye lid (UEW), snout length (SL), eye length
(EL), forelimb length (FLL), hand length (HAL), thigh
length (TL), shank length (SHL), tarsus length (TaL),
foot length (FoL). The measurements were taken
using a Mitutoyo Digimatic Caliper (to the nearest
0.1mm). The collected specimens were fixed using
5% formaldehyde, preserved in 70% ethyl alcohol and
were deposited in the Kerala Agricultural University
Natural History Museum (KAUNHM), Thrissur with
appropriate registration numbers. In this paper the
rhacophorid frogs obtained from PKTR were grouped
into “large frogs” (SVL >50mm), “medium frogs”
(SVL 30–50mm) and “small frogs” (SVL < 30mm)
based on the snout-vent length (SVL). The frogs were
identified by comparing the standard measurements
76 0 35’0”E 76 0 40’0”E 76 0 45’0”E 76 0 50’0”E
Nenmara Forest Division
10 0 30’0”N
Chalakudy Forest Division
Tamil Nadu
10 0 25’0”N
Vazhachal Forest Division
10 0 20’0”N
Figure 1. Map of Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
3206
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
taken on the frogs with the published literature.
Results
Eleven species of rhacophorid frogs in four genera,
namely, Rhacophorus (three species), Polypedates
(one species), Pseudophilautus (one species) and
Raorchestes (six species) were recorded from PKTR
during the present study. All the 11 species of
rhacophorids recorded from PKTR are endemic to the
Western Ghats.
1. Charpa Tree Frog Polypedates occidentalis
Das & Dutta, 2006
A large frog (SVL= 55mm) having dark yellowishbrown
color with a dark hour-glass-shaped mark on
dorsum. Distinct marbling on the sides of thigh and
belly. Snout pointed with nostrils closer to snout tip.
Supra tympanic fold prominent, fingers not webbed
(Image 1).
One individual was encountered on a wet rock near
a stream flowing through a reed (Ochlandra sp.) patch
at Malakkapara, buffer zone of PKTR. This location
is about 50km north to the type locality of this species
(Charpa in Vazhachal Forest Division). Polypedates
occidentalis is also reported from Karnataka (Hegde
& Bhat 2011). It is considered a ‘Data Deficient’
species, according to IUCN (Das 2008) calling for a
reassessment based on new information available for
the species, which is probably adequate with respect to
the distribution range and threats.
2. Kani Bush Frog Pseudophilautus kani (Biju &
Bossuyt, 2009)
A small frog (SVL= 27.52+1.71 mm, Table 1) with
brown to light grayish-brown dorsum. Shank length
almost equal to the thigh length. Canthus rostralis and
loreal region dark grayish-brown, prominent supra
tympanic fold, 2/3 rd of tympanum including supra
tympanic fold blackish (Image 2). Hind limbs possess
rudimentary webbing while webbing is lacking in the
forelimbs.
Calling males were encountered from bushes and
female frogs from ground litter. In PKTR, they are
seen from 400–1400 m at the top of Karimalagopuram.
P. kani has been sighted from teak plantations, moist
deciduous forests and evergreen forests and is one of
the commonest bush frogs in PKTR.
Biju & Bossuyt (2009) had reported P. kani only
from the Agasthyamala region, south of the Shengotta
Gap in Western Ghats. Thus, the present sighting of
Image 1. Polypedates occidentalis Das & Dutta, 2006
© K.M. Jobin
© K.M. Jobin
Image 2. Pseudophilautus kani (Biju & Bossuyt, 2009)
this species from the Anamalai region is of interest.
The SVL of the female P. kani, reported by Biju &
Bossuyt (2009) was only 24.4mm, while the average
SVL measurement for the females that we got from
PKTR measured 27.52mm.
3. Variable Bush Frog Raorchestes akroparallagi
(Biju & Bossuyt, 2009)
A small frog (SVL=21.46+0.46 mm, Table 1)
with a bright light green dorsum. The snout pointed,
canthus rostralis, loreal, supra tympanic fold and
forearm creamy to pale brown with numerous dark
brown spots (Image 3).
At, PKTR it was encountered throughout from
an altitude of 450–1000 m and above, from the teak
plantations, moist deciduous forests and evergreen
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214
3207

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
forests. The locations from where this frog was
sighted include the Parambikulam earth dam, base of
Karimalagopuram, Kuriyarkutti, Orukomban in PKTR
and from Thoothanpaara Estate in Nelliampathies in
the buffer region. Biju & Bossuyt (2009) reported this
species from Wayanad and Agasthyamala regions of
Western Ghats in Kerala. This is the first report of
this species from the Anamalais of the Western Ghats.
There is adequate information from published sources
to assess this species which has not been evaluated
until now.
4. Anil’s Bush Frog Raorchestes anili (Biju &
Bossuyt, 2006)
A small bush frog (SVL= 24.81+0.51 mm, Table
1), narrow pointed snout, head width which is more
than head length. Light chocolate brown color with a
dark inverted ‘V’ pattern on dorsum. Supra tympanic
fold prominent, canthus rostralis, loreal and supra
tympanic fold dark brown. Metallic silver colored iris.
Blackish blotches on lateral sides of abdomen, dark
chocolate brown bands on both forelimbs and hind
limbs (Image 4).
At PKTR R. anili was encountered at Poopara
region in the core zone and from Malakkapara in the
buffer zone. At Poopara the calling males were found
primarily on the leaves of Curcuma sp. leaves near
an evergreen patch at an altitude of 840m. While at
Malakkapara R. anili was found among the pebbles and
leaf litter in a stream. Biju & Bossuyt (2009) reported
this species from Wayanad and Agasthyamala regions
of Western Ghats in Kerala. The present sighting thus
is the first report of this species from the Anamalais of
the Western Ghats.
According to IUCN red listing it is a ‘Least Concern’
species (Biju 2006). Taking into account the fact that
R. anili is endemic to the Western Ghats, known only
from four locations within southern Western Ghats,
of which two sites are located in nonprotected areas.
And also the fact that the nonprotected areas within
the Western Ghats are facing extreme stress from
various forms of anthropogenic factors, which in turn
may adversely affect the quality of the microhabitat
parameters for the survival of amphibians, a is
reassessment recommended for this species.
5. Jayaram’s Bush Frog Raorchestes jayarami
(Biju & Bossuyt, 2009)
Small sized bush frog (SVL= 22.17+0.79 mm,
Table 1) with a bright green dorsum. Green coloration
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
Image 3. Raorchestes akroparallagi (Biju & Bossuyt, 2009)
Image 4. Raorchestes anili (Biju & Bossuyt, 2006)
© K.M. Jobin
© K.M. Jobin
extending to the lower arm of forelimb leaving the
upper arm white. Snout pointed, tympanum and supra
tympanic fold not distinct. Lateral part of abdomen
and limbs white or rarely with a sky blue tinge (Image
5).
At PKTR, R. jayarami was sighted only
above 1000m altitude in the evergreen patches of
Karimalagopuram and several calling male frogs were
also sighted in the tea plantation near the evergreen
patch at Shekkalmudi. Biju & Bossuyt (2009) reported
this species from Valparai within the Anamalai Hills of
the southern Western Ghats in Tamil Nadu. Thus, the
present sighting from the Kerala part of the Anamalai
Hills is of interest.
3208
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
© K.M. Jobin
Image 5. Raorchestes jayarami (Biju & Bossuyt, 2009)
This species is not evaluated and needs assessment
by the IUCN Red List.
6. Mark’s Bush Frog Raorchestes marki (Biju &
Bossuyt, 2009)
Small sized bush frog (SVL= 20.71+0.06 mm, Table
1) with dark chocolate brown to dark brown color with
reddish markings on the body, pointed snout, shank
longer than the thigh. Eyes protruding with coppery
iris. Supra tympanic fold prominent. Lateral sides of
limbs and abdomen possess small blackish spots or
blotches (Image 6).
R. marki were encountered from a semi-evergreen
patch on top of Vengoli Hill, at an altitude of 1120m.
Calling males were sighted among bushes and tree bark
at a height of 1–2 m. The type locality of this species
is Kaikatty in Nelliampathies (Biju & Bossuyt 2009)
and is known until now only from the type locality.
The present observation from PKTR thus is a new site
record for R. marki. However, both these locations
are within the Anamalai Hills of the Western Ghats.
According to the IUCN criteria B1ab (iii)+2ab(iii) ver
3.1, it is a ‘Critically Endangered’ species (IUCN SSC
Amphibian Specialist Group, 2011).
7. Kalpetta Bush Frog Raorchestes nerostagona
(Biju & Bossuyt, 2005)
Medium sized (SVL=34mm) canopy bush frog
with skin looking similar to bark of a tree. Toe
webbed, dermal fringe present along outer margin of
forelimb and hind limb. Prominent tympanum and
supratympanic fold present. Shank longer than thigh
and dark brown bands present. Male frogs will make
Image 6. Raorchestes marki (Biju & Bossuyt, 2009)
© K.M. Jobin
a characteristic single noted call from the canopies
during the breeding season.
This species was identified based on the characteristic
call of the frog, which was heard from the canopy of
the evergreen forest patches in Shakkalmudi in PKTR
and Thoothanpaara estate in the buffer region, between
800–1000 m. Biju & Bossuyt (2009) have reported
this species from Wayanad region of Western Ghats in
Kerala. Purushotham & Tapley (2011) have reported
this species from Agumbe Rainforest Research Station,
Agumbe in Karnataka. The present report from PKTR
within the Anamalai Hills is thus the first record of this
species from south of Palghat gap. According to the
IUCN criteria B1ab (iii) ver 3.1, it is an Endangered
species (Biju & Bossuyt 2006b).
8. Ponmudi Bush Frog Raorchestes ponmudi
(Biju & Bossuyt, 2005)
Medium sized frog (SVL= 35.51+2.52 mm, Table 1)
with robust body and protruding eyes. Light chocolate
brown or creamy white color and rarely white spots on
the dorsum. Snout round, toe partially webbed, lateral
side of thigh and tarsus possess light grayish-white or
orange brown marblings (Image 7).
Calling male frogs were sighted from semievergreen
forests at Poopara and Vengoli in the core
zone of PKTR and also seen from Malakkappara, in
the buffer zone of PKTR at an altitude of 700m and
above. Biju & Bossuyt (2009) have reported this
species from Kalpetta, Mananthavady and Sulthan’s
Battery from Wayanad District, Gavi and Vagaman in
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214
3209

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
Idukki District and Ponmudi in Thiruvananthapuram
District of Kerala and Valparai in Tamil Nadu. Calling
males were seen at a height ranging from 1–6 m from
ground in PKTR. However, the individuals from the
Malakkapara in the buffer zone of PKTR were sighted
among decayed wood on the ground and another from
a tree hole at a height of 1m in an evergreen patch.
Biju & Bossuyt (2009) had sighted the species at a
height of 8–15 m in Ponmudi and Valparai, while at
Kalpetta it was sighted at a height of 2–4 m height.
Purushotham & Tapley (2011) reported this species
from Agumbe Rainforest Research Station, Agumbe in
Karnataka. The present sighting thus is the first report
of this species from the Kerala part of the Anamalai
Hills.
According to the IUCN criteria B1ab(iii), it is a
Critically Endangered species (Biju 2004). However,
taking into account the present understanding on the
distribution of the species from across Kerala, Tamil
Nadu and Karnataka, a reassessment of the Raorchestes
ponmudi would probably downlist the conservation
status to Vulnerable.
9. Kalakkad Tree Frog Rhacophorus calcadensis
Ahl, 1927
Medium sized (SVL= 37.03+0.81 mm, Table 1)
slender frog with dark brown to light reddish-brown
color dorsum with darker patches and possess a
tubercles on dorsal skin and on lower labials. Shank
length almost similar to thigh length. Prominent
dermal fringe along the outer margin of the forelimb
and hind limb present. Dark bands in the forelimb and
hindlimb (Image 8).
Four individuals were sighted among the bushes
near a water hole between the evergreen forest and tea
plantation at Shekkalmudi in PKTR at an altitude of
1118m. R. calcadensis is known only from Kalakkad-
Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve in Tamil Nadu (Ahl 1927;
Vasudevan et al. 2001). The present record is thus the
first report of this species from the Anamalai Hills of
the Western Ghats.
According to the IUCN criteria B1ab(iii), it is
Endangered (Biju et al. 2004b). However, taking into
account the present understanding on the distribution
of the species, a reassessment of the Rhacophorus
calcadensis could probably downlist the conservation
status to Vulnerable based on the distribution range.
10. Malabar Gliding Frog Rhacophorus
malabaricus Jerdon, 1870
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
Image 7. Raorchestes ponmudi (Biju & Bossuyt, 2005)
Image 8. Rhacophorus calcadensis Ahl, 1927
© K.M. Jobin
© K.M. Jobin
A large sized tree frog (SVL=70mm, Table 1) with
a green dorsum and a prominent red colored web
between fingers of hindlimb and forelimb. Head width
larger than head length. Dermal fold along with the
outer margin of the arm and on hindlimb from tarsus
to tip of fourth toe (Image 9).
This species was located from Parambikulam earthdam
and Kuriarkutti at an altitude of 565m in PKTR.
Rhacophorus malabaricus is a widely distributed
species in Western Ghats from southern Maharashtra,
Goa, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala.
11. False Malabar Tree Frog Rhacophorus
pseudomalabaricus Vasudevan & Dutta, 2000
Medium sized (SVL 46.54+2.16 mm, Table 1) frog
with green dorsum with dark stripes like venation of
leaves on the green dorsum and on dorsal surface of
limbs. Eyes are protruding, distinct supra-tympanic
fold present. Dermal fold along the outer margin of
the arm and on hind limb from tarsus to tip of fourth
toe (Image 10).
3210
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
Image 9, Rhacophorus malabaricus Jerdon, 1870
© K.M. Jobin
Two calling males were sighted from bushes and
among the ground ferns near an artificial water hole
between the evergreen forest and tea plantation at
Shekkalmudi, PKTR at an altitude of 1118m. The
type locality of this species is Andiparai Shola, Indira
Gandhi Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu (Vasudevan &
Dutta 2000), and until now it is known only from the
type locality. The present observation thus is a new
site record for the R. pseudomalabaricus. However,
both these location are within the Anamalai hills of
the Western Ghats. It is also interesting to note that R.
pseudomalabaricus and R. calcadensis were found in
the same pond at Shekkalmudi in PKTR. According to
IUCN criteria B1ab(iii)ver 3.1. R. pseudomalabaricus
is Critically Endangered (Biju et al. 2004a).
Conclusion
The present study shows the significance of the
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve on the conservation of
amphibians particularly the rhacophorids . Out of the 52
species of rhacophorids in Western Ghats, 11 (21.15%)
have been recorded from PKTR during the present
study. Many of these sightings of the rhacophorids
are of significance. For example, the sighting of
Rhacophorus calcadensis is the first record of this
species outside the Kalakkad-Mundanthurai Tiger
Reserve in Tamil Nadu. Raorchestes nerostagona the
present sighting is the first record south of Palakkad
Gap, for R. ponmudi and R. anili, this is the first
record from the Anamalai Hills. Raorchestes marki,
R. jayarami and Rhacophorus pseudomalabaricus are
first records from PKTR.
Of the 11 species of rhacophorids three are
Critically Endangered (CR), two Endangered (EN),
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214
Image 10, Rhacophorus pseudomalabaricus Vasudevan &
Dutta, 2000
and one Data Deficient (DD). Thus nearly 50% of the
rhacophorids of PKTR are threatened with extinction.
But if a reassessment of conservation status of these
species is done using the additional distributional
information, the status would change considerably.
It thus warrants immediate attention of the reserve
managers on the conservation of the amphibians in
their management prescriptions. It also underlines the
necessity to measure the wealth of amphibians in the
Western Ghats in general and Kerala in particular, as
many of the rhacophorids included in this paper are
the first report of those species from PKTR. If detailed
explorations are done in Parambikulam and other parts
of the Western Ghats, the results would be rewarding.
Moreover, the result of the study also show how
important is it to protect every bit of the biodiversity
rich Western Ghats.
REFERENCE
© K.M. Jobin
Biju, S.D. (2003). Reproductive mode in the Shrub
Frog Philautus glandulosus (Jerdon, 1853) (Anura:
Rhacophoridae). Current Science 84(3): 283–284.
Biju, S.D. (2004). Raorchestes ponmudi. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. Downloaded on 14 March 2012.
Biju, S.D. (2006). Raorchestes anili. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. . Downloaded on 14 March 2012.
Biju, S.D. & F. Bossuyt (2005a). A new species of frog
(Ranidae, Rhacophoridae, Philautus) from the rainforest
canopy in the Western Ghats, India. Current Science 88:
3211

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
Table 1. Morphometric measurements (mm) of rhacophorids from Parambikulam Tiger Reserve, Kerala.
Species Sex Locality
Museum
registration no.
SVL HL HW IUE UEW SL EL FLL HAL TL ShL TaL FoL
Pseudophilautus kani F Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011213 27.61 9.73 9.11 8.04 1.72 4.43 3.24 5.85 6.95 12.91 13.21 7.67 10.11
F Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011214 29.18 10.72 10.19 9.42 3.04 5.43 3.44 6.98 6.36 12.3 13.63 8.21 10.38
F Sungam KAUNHM 2011215 25.76 9.22 9.88 8.27 2.56 4.87 3.57 6.73 7.98 12.94 13.94 8.48 10.08
Average 27.52 9.89 9.73 8.58 2.44 4.91 3.42 6.52 7.10 12.72 13.59 8.12 10.19
Std. Dev. 1.71 0.76 0.56 0.74 0.67 0.50 0.17 0.59 0.82 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.17
Raorchestes
akroparallagi
M Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011228 21.08 7.37 7.21 6.51 1.07 3.42 2.69 4.9 4.44 9.96 10.14 6.75 7.12
M Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011229 21.32 7.46 7.32 6.64 1.42 3.52 2.56 5.1 4.85 10.2 10.08 6.89 7.2
M Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011230 21.97 7.65 7.48 6.77 1.62 3.74 2.92 5.55 5.22 10.8 10.66 7.06 7.25
Average 21.46 7.49 7.34 6.64 1.37 3.56 2.72 5.18 4.84 10.32 10.29 6.90 7.19
Std. Dev. 0.46 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.28 0.16 0.18 0.33 0.39 0.43 0.32 0.16 0.07
Raorchestes anili M Karimala KAUNHM 2011206 24.23 9.14 9.9 7.87 1.94 3.75 3.2 5.79 5.98 12.25 12.89 7.7 9.08
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011207 25.22 9.04 9.97 8.27 2.28 4.38 3.57 6.88 6.06 12.68 12.32 8.6 10.21
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011208 24.97 9.85 8.84 7.7 2.09 4.65 3.74 6.47 6.82 12.47 13.32 8.45 9.34
Average 24.81 9.34 9.57 7.95 2.10 4.26 3.50 6.38 6.29 12.47 12.84 8.25 9.54
Std. Dev. 0.51 0.44 0.63 0.29 0.17 0.46 0.28 0.55 0.46 0.22 0.50 0.48 0.59
Raorchestes jayarami M Karimala KAUNHM 2011242 22.39 8.45 7.81 7.51 1.44 4.09 3.08 5.75 6.44 11.3 10.95 6.77 7.79
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011243 21.3 9.09 7.78 7.35 1.5 3.85 2.92 5.71 6.46 11.26 11.21 7.6 7.97
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011244 22.83 9.9 7.23 7.42 1.51 3.57 2.86 5.37 6.05 10.47 11.22 7.13 8.15
Average 22.17 9.15 7.61 7.43 1.48 3.84 2.95 5.61 6.32 11.01 11.13 7.17 7.97
Std. Dev. 0.79 0.73 0.33 0.08 0.04 0.26 0.11 0.21 0.23 0.47 0.15 0.42 0.18
F Karimala KAUNHM 2011245 30.01 12 11.59 9.45 2.71 6.1 3.93 7.39 8.44 15.25 15.16 9.41 11.17
Raorchestes marki M Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011236 21.07 7.77 6.52 6.06 1.45 2.96 2.25 5.53 5.63 10.1 11.04 6.83 8.01
M Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011237 20.08 7.75 6.61 6.41 1.43 3.21 2.32 5.8 5.68 10.08 10.82 6.53 7.91
M Parambikulam KAUNHM 2011238 20.99 7.74 7.01 5.65 1.41 3.49 2.57 6.03 6.06 10.06 10.69 6.39 7.55
3212
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
Species Sex Locality
Museum
registration no.
SVL HL HW IUE UEW SL EL FLL HAL TL ShL TaL FoL
Average 20.71 7.75 6.71 6.04 1.43 3.22 2.38 5.79 5.79 10.08 10.85 6.58 7.82
Std. Dev. 0.06 0.02 0.35 0.29 0.03 0.37 0.23 0.35 0.30 0.03 0.25 0.31 0.33
Raorchestes ponmudi M Karimala KAUNHM 2011225 33.44 12.83 10.9 11.01 2.9 4.51 4.17 8.53 9.05 16.86 17.21 10.08 13.45
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011226 34.78 13.86 11.62 11.11 3.2 6.34 4.66 9.37 9.65 17.73 17.47 11.01 13.83
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011227 38.31 14.13 11.67 11.62 3.19 5.87 4.41 9.71 10.63 18.88 18.89 11.72 14.58
Average 35.51 13.61 11.40 11.25 3.10 5.57 4.41 9.20 9.78 17.82 17.86 10.94 13.95
Std. Dev. 2.52 0.69 0.43 0.33 0.17 0.95 0.25 0.61 0.80 1.01 0.90 0.82 0.58
Rhacophorus
calcadensis
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011209 38.02 10.42 11.06 10.37 2.66 8.23 3.79 7.07 7.91 14.96 15.33 9.93 13.25
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011210 36.22 11.16 12.41 8.12 3.4 6.39 4.15 8.55 8.81 17.2 16.92 10.21 11.99
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011211 37.32 10.86 11.58 8.43 2.83 6.12 3.97 7.28 7.41 15.33 14.99 9.35 11.32
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011212 36.54 11.25 12.27 8.21 2.64 6.1 3.96 9.99 13.6 16.39 17.13 10.6 12
Average 37.03 10.92 11.83 8.78 2.88 6.71 3.97 8.22 9.43 15.97 16.09 10.02 12.14
Std. Dev. 0.81 0.37 0.63 1.07 0.36 1.02 0.15 1.35 2.84 1.02 1.09 0.53 0.81
Rhacophorus
malabaricus
F Karimala KAUNHM 2011161 70 20.91 18.83 13.9 3.91 10.58 6.18 16.24 19.43 13.84 31.96 18.43 33.9
Rhacophorus
pseudomalabaricus
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011197 48.06 16.43 15.84 15.44 4.64 8.12 5.8 12.63 12.76 24.6 26.35 14.49 20.32
M Karimala KAUNHM 2011198 45.01 14.75 14.81 13.35 3.79 7.42 5.15 11.07 12.12 24.05 23.27 12.2 18.17
Average 46.54 15.59 15.33 14.40 4.22 7.77 5.48 11.85 12.44 24.33 24.81 13.35 19.25
Std. Dev. 2.16 1.19 0.73 1.48 0.60 0.49 0.46 1.10 0.45 0.39 2.18 1.62 1.52
SVL = snout vent length; HW = head width; HL - head length; IUE = maximum distance between upper eye lid; UEW = maximum width of upper eye lid; SL = snout length; EL = eye length; FLL = forelimb length;
HAL = hand length; TL = thigh length; SJL = shank length; TaL = tarsus length; FoL = foot length.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214
3213

Rhacophorids in Parambikulam Tiger Reserve
175–178.
Biju, S.D. & F. Bossuyt (2005b). Two new Philautus (Anura,
Ranidae, Rhacophorinae) from Ponmudi Hill in the Western
Ghats of India. Copeia 1: 29–37.
Biju, S.D. & F. Bossuyt (2006a). Two new species of Philautus
(Anura, Ranidae, Rhacophorinae) from the Western Ghats,
India. Amphibia-Reptilia 27: 1–9.
Biju, S.D. & F. Bossuyt (2006b). Raorchestes nerostagona.
In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Version 2011.2. . Downloaded on
14 March 2012.
Biju, S.D. & F. Bossuyt (2009). Systematics and phylogeny
of Philautus Gistel, 1848 (Anura, Rhacophoridae) in the
Western Ghats of India, with descriptions of 12 new species.
Zoological Journal of the Linnaean Society 155: 374–444.
Biju, S.D., Y. Shouche., A. Dubois, S.K. Dutta & F. Bossuyt
(2010). A ground-dwelling rhacophorid frog from the
highest mountain peak of the Western Ghats of India.
Current Science 98 (8): 119–1125.
Biju, S.D., S.K. Dutta, K. Vasudevan, C. Srinivasulu & S.P.
Vijayakumar (2004a). Rhacophorus pseudomalabaricus.
In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Version 2011.2. . Downloaded on
14 March 2012.
Biju, S.D., G.D. Bhuddhe, S.K. Dutta, K. Vasudevan, C.
Srinivasulu & S.P. Vijayakumar (2004b). Rhacophorus
calcadensis. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species. Version 2011.2. .
Downloaded on 14 March 2012.
Bossuyt, F. (2002). A new species of Philautus (Anura: Ranidae)
from the Western Ghats of India. Journal of Herpetology
36: 656–661.
Bossuyt, F. & A. Dubois (2001). A review of the frog genus
Philautus Gistel, 1848 (Amphibia, Anura, Ranidae,
Rhacophorinae), Zeylanica 6(1): 1–112.
Conservation International (2005). Biodiversity Hotspots
. Downloaded on 30 March 2012.
Das, I. (2008). Polypedates occidentalis. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. . Downloaded on 14 March 2012.
Das, I. & M.S. Ravichandran (1998). A new species of
Polypedates (Anura: Rhacophoridae) from the Western
Ghats, India, allied to the Sri Lankan P. cruciger Blyth,
1852. Hamadryad 22: 88–94.
Das, I. & S.K. Dutta (2006). New species of Polypedates
(Anura: Rhacophoridae) from the Western Ghats, southwest
India, Journal of Herpetology 40(2): 214–220.
Gururaja, K.V. & T.V. Ramachandra (2006). Direct
development in White-nosed Frog Philautus cf. leucorhinus.
Current Science 90(3): 450–454.
Gururaja, K.V., K.P. Dinesh, M.J. Palot, C. Radhakrishnan
& T.V. Ramachandra (2007). A new species of Philautus
Gistel (Amphibia: Anura: Rhacophoridae) from southern
K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer
Western Ghats, India. Zootaxa 1621: 1–16.
Hegde, V.D. & G. Bhat (2011). First record of Charpa Tree
Frog Polypedates occidentalis from Karnataka State. Frog
Leg 15: 10–11.
IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group (2011). Raorchestes
marki. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
Version 2011.2. . Downloaded on
14 March 2012.
Kaler, O.P. (2011). First Tiger Conservation Plan for
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve, 2011-12 to 2020-21. Kerala
State Forest and Wildlife Department.
Krishnamurthy, S.V., K.V. Gururaja & A.H.M. Reddy
(2002). Direct development in Philautus glandulosus
(Anura: Rhacophoridae). Herpetological Natural History
9(1): 97–102.
Kuramoto, M. & S.H. Joshy (2003). Two new species of the
genus Philautus (Anura: Rhacophoridae) from the Western
Ghats, southwestern India. Current Herpetology 22: 51–
60.
Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B.
daFonseca & J. Kent (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for
conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858
Patil, N.S. & R.D. Kanamadi (1997). Direct development in
the rhacophorid frog, Philautus variabilis (Gunter). Current
Science 73: 697–701.
Purushotham, C.B. & B. Tapley (2011). Checklist of
Amphibians: Agumbe Rainforest Research Station. Frog
Leg 16: 2–14.
Radhakrishnan, C. (1996). Amphibians of Parambikulam
Wildlife Sanctuary, Kerala. Cobra 26: 10–17.
Rao, C.R.N. (1937). On some new forms of Batrachia from
South india. Proceedings of Indian Academy of Sciences.
6(6): 387–427.
Satyamurthi, S.T. (1967). The south Indian amphibian in the
collection of the Madras Govt. Museum. Bulletin of Madras
Govt. Museum (New Series) (Natural History Section) 7(2):
1–87.
Vasudevan, K. & S.K. Dutta (2000). A new species of
Rhacophorus (Anura: Rhacophoridae) from the Western
Ghats, India. Hamadryad 25(1): 21–28.
Vasudevan, K., A. Kumar & R. Chellam (2001). Structure
and composition of rainforest floor amphibian communities
in Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve. Current Science
80(3): 406–412.
Zachariah, A., K.P. Dinesh, E. Kunhikrishnan, S. Das,
D.V. Raju, C. Radhakrishnan, M.J. Palot & S. Kalesh
(2011a). Nine new species of frogs of the genus Raorchestes
(Amphibia: Anura: Rhacophoridae) from southern Western
Ghats, India. Biosystematica 5(1): 24–48.
Zachariah, A., K.P. Dinesh, C. Radhakrishnan, E.
Kunhikrishnan, M.J. Palot & C.K. Vishnudas (2011b).
A new species of Polypedates Tschudi (Amphibia: Anura:
Rhacophoridae) from southern Western Ghats, Kerala,
India. Biosystematica 5(1): 49–53.
3214
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3205–3214

JoTT No t e 4(13): 3215–3217
First record of Resseliella salvadorae
(Rao) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) and its
parasitoid from stem and leaf galls of
Salvadora persica L. Sudan
E.M. Moawia 1 , S.I. Ensaf 2 & R.M. Sharma 3
1,2
Shambat Research Station, Agricultural Research
Corporation, P.O.Box 30, Khartoum North, Sudan 1111
3
Zoological Survey of India, Western Regional Centre,
Vidhyanagar, Akurdi, Pune, Maharashtra 411044, India
Email: 1 elaiderous3@yahoo.com, 2 ensafmohamed1@gmail.com,
3
rmsharma53@yahoo.in (corresponding author)
Salvadora persica L. (Salvadoraceae), commonly
known as Tooth Brush Tree, Mustard Tree or Salt
Bush, is an evergreen shrub. Its leaves are oblongelliptic
to almost circular, light to dark green, rather
fleshy. It is widespread and native to many countries
including India (locally known as Pilu or Jhak) and
Sudan (locally known as Arak). It is a xerophytic
plant, occupying desert floodplains and also common
in river and stream bank vegetation. It is highly salt
tolerant thus very useful in improvement of salt affected
black soils, eco-restoration of the degraded saline
wastelands. It can be used for sand dune reclamation.
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: S.S. Udikeri
Manuscript details:
Ms # o2872
Received 13 July 2011
Final received 10 August 2012
Finally accepted 12 September 2012
Citation: Moawia, E.M., S.I. Ensaf & R.M. Sharma (2012). First record of
Resseliella salvadorae (Rao) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) and its parasitoid
from stem and leaf galls of Salvadora persica L. Sudan Journal of
Threatened Taxa 4(13): 3215–3217.
Copyright: © E.M. Moawia, S.I. Ensaf & R.M. Sharma 2012. Creative
Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use
of this article in any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and
distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of
publication.
Acknowledgements: RMS thanks the Director, Zoological Survey of India,
Kolkata for permitting him to carry out the studies and providing facilities.
We are also thankful to Dr. (Mrs) K. Rajmohana, Scientist-C, Zoological
Survey of India, Kozhikode for identifying the parasites.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:E59E630E-09C1-409D-9E09-
02F2F5D135E0
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
It is also a medicinal plant and
almost all the plant parts have been
found to be medically important
and possess pharmaceutical
applications. The plant does not suffer from any
major pests and diseases (Rao et al. 2003), however,
its leaves and stems are subjected to gall formation
by Resseliella (=Thomasiniana) salvadorae (Rao)
(Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) reported from India (Rao
1951, 1971; Mani 1973; Sharma et al. 2003; Sharma
2009). Platygaster salvadorae Rao (Hymenoptera:
Platygastridae: Platygastrinae) has been recorded
parasitizing the gall maker (Mani 1973). The present
report is a first record of galls, gall causing insect and
its parasitoid on Salvadora persica L. from Khartoum
State, Sudan.
Materials and Methods
Galls were noticed on stem and leaves of coppice
of Salvadora persica in the vicinity of Shambat
Research Station, and National Botanic Garden in
Khartoum North, Sudan (15 0 31’N & 32 0 35’E) during
the month of October 2010. The gall formed areas of
the plant were covered with finely perforated plastic
bags to monitor the emergence of the gall maker and
its parasitoids.
Galls, cross sections through the galls, insect adults
emerged from the galls were examined under a digital
microscope (Digital Blue QX5 computer microscope,
(www.digiblue.com) and their images captured.
Results and Discussion
Leaf gall (Image 1 a–f): Epi-hypophyllous,
spherical, mostly adjacent to the midrib (Image 1a).
Larval chamber cylindrical, more than one chamber
per gall containing single larva inside (Image 1c).
Stem gall: Subglobose, ovoid or fusiform, glabrous,
grayish in color, hard, woody, indehiscent, persistent
swellings of tender branches, 5–10 mm long and 5mm
thick (Image 1d). One to six chambers per gall were
noticed (Image 1e). As many as 13 galls were produced
along 10cm length and 5mm thick stem. Larva seen in
one of the stem gall chamber (Image 1f).
Gall midge larva and adult are shown in Image 2
a–d. Initially, hymenopterous parasitoids (platygastrid)
(Image 3 a–d) were recovered from the perforated
plastic bags followed by adult gall midges (Images 2c,
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3215–3217 3215

1
1
2
2
(c) (c)
1
(d) (d)
Resseliella salvadorae
2
(c)
E.M. Moawia et al.
(d)
a
b
c
11
22
(d)
(c) (c)
3
4
d
(e) (e)
(d)
e
3
(f) (f)
f
3
3
5
Image 1. Leaf gall and cecidomyiid larvae. © Moawia Mohamed
(a) (f) leaf gall, (b) pupal skin on exit hole on underside of the leaf, (c) leaf gall section showing two chambers and cecidomyiid
larvae, (d) stem galls, (e) longitudinal section through stem galls and (f) cecidomyiid larva in a stem gall
a
b
male and 2d, female). However, the
parasites recovered in the present
study key out to genus Platygaster
Latreille (Rajmohana pers. comm.
15 June 2011).
Salvadora being important
plant from medicinal point of view
and its usefulness in ecorestoration
of waste lands warrants detailed
studies.
REFERENCES
c
Image 2. Gall midge larva and adult. © Moawia Mohamed
(a) developing gall midge larva, (b) gall midge pupa, (c) gall midge adult (male) and
(d) gall midge adult (female).
d
Mani, M.S. (1973). Plant Galls of India.
Macmillan, India, 354pp.
Rao, G., A.K. Nayak & A.
Chinchmalatpure (2003).
Salvadora persica: A life support
species for salt affected black soils.
Technical Bulletin No. 1 Published
by Central Soil Salinity Research
Institute (ICAR), Regional Research
Station, Bharuch, Gujarat, 44pp.
Rao, S.N. (1951). Descriptions of two
new genera and nine new species
and one known species of gall
midges from India (Itonodidae:
Diptera) from India. Indian Journal
3216
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3215–3217

Resseliella salvadorae
E.M. Moawia et al.
1
2
1
2
3
3
1
2 (c)
1
2 (c)
3
3
(c)
a
(c)
c
Figure 3. Parasitoid wasp. © Moawia Mohamed
(a) inside the midge larva, (b) inside the midge larva freed from the gall, (c) adult
(female) and (d) adults (males).
(d)
b
(d)
d
(d)
(d)
of Entomology 11: 109–127.
Rao, S.N. (1971). Gall midge damage
to plants of medical importance
in Marathwada. Marathwada
University Journal of Science,
Section B, Biological Sciences 10:
173–176.
Sharma, R.M., P.V. Joshi and M.
Shindikar (2003). First Report
on Plant Galls (Zoocecidia) from
Mangrove Swamps of Vikhroli,
Maharashtra. Zoos’ Print Journal
18(10): 1217–1219
Sharma, R.M. (2009). Checklist
of Indian Gall midges (Diptera:
Cecidomyiidae). http://zsi.gov.
in/checklist/Indian%20Gall%20
midges.pdf. Accessed on 13 July
2011.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3215–3217
3217

JoTT No t e 4(13): 3218–3222
The distribution of Himalayan Newts,
Tylototriton verrucosus in the Punakha-
Wangdue Valley, Bhutan
Jigme Tshelthrim Wangyal 1 & Dhan Bahadhur
Gurung 2
1
District Forest Office, District Administration, Trashigang
42001, Bhutan
2
College of Natural Resources, Royal University of Bhutan,
Lobesa, Punakha 14001, Bhutan
Email: 1 jigmewangyal@gmail.com (corresponding author),
2
dbg2006@gmail.com
The Himalayan Newt Tylototriton verrucosus is
considered one of the most primitive species amongst
living Salamanders (Das 1987) and is also the only
salamander known from Bhutan. John Anderson, who
described the species in 1871, discovered the species
in flooded rice fields near the small Chinese town of
Nantin.
Although a well studied species, the Himalayan
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Sanjay Molur
Manuscript details:
Ms # o3136
Received 25 March 2012
Final received 05 October 2012
Finally accepted 07 October 2012
Citation: Wangyal, J.T. & D.B. Gurung (2012). The distribution of Himalayan
Newts, Tylototriton verrucosus in the Punakha-Wangdue Valley, Bhutan.
Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(13): 3218–3222.
Copyright: © Jigme Tshelthrim Wangyal & Dhan Bahadhur Gurung
2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows
unrestricted use of this article in any medium for non-profit purposes,
reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors
and the source of publication.
Acknowledgements: We would like to, in no particular order, thank the
following individuals. Yeshi Phuntsho in Gasa and Punakha areas; Yeejay,
Nima Gyeltshen and Dorji Namgay in Lamperi, Thinleygang and Dochula
areas; Namgay Tshering (Gathpoo) in Sha areas. They have helped us
collect and take measurements of the specimens and have never denied
befriending us even at the middle of the nights. Sonam Dorji (GP), Baep
Tshering and few others accompanied us to the field in Thinleygang when
in the College, our sincere thanks to them. AP Sonam of Goemkha Village,
Toebisa helped us catch at least four species, thanks to his spirited search
for the animals. Thanks are also due to all people of the study areas. The
first author in particular is glad to receive the assistance of the Rufford
Small Grant for the study of this group of animals. Phurba Lhendup, WWF
Bhutan programme needs a special mention for generously allowing me
to use his camera during the study.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2FF1568B-2804-400D-9574-
3D366EE6C5F6
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
Newts’ occurrence is hardly
known in Bhutan because of poor
reporting. After Frost (1985),
who reported the presence of the
species without any specific location, Palden (2003),
confirmed its occurrence in Thinleygang and Kabjisa
areas. Other than these two reports, there is no
evidence to prove that the species has been ever studied
in Bhutan. However, outside Bhutan, the species is
reported from China, India, Nepal and Thailand.
Therefore, this study was taken up in the Punakha-
Wangdue Phodrang Valley solely to look at the
distribution and habitat of the species.
Materials and Methods
In this survey, a time-constrained visual encounter
search technique (Campbell & Christman 1982; Corn
& Bury 1989) was used because of the study areas’
diverse habitat types such as paddy fields, roadsides,
river banks and forests (Fig. 1). The search area
within the valley was not fixed as species encountered
anywhere within the valley was considered for
distribution mapping.
Nocturnal road cruising and opportunistic
collecting was the primary method used for collection
of data. Rainy nights were taken as an advantage to
catch the newts that move along the roads. While
short distances were covered by walking, longer
distances were covered using a car. Survey teams of
two to three people used a walk-and-turn method to
survey all of the area within the study site. A team of
two people was used for scouring every paddy field
and they walked in and around the entire field looking
for the species. The observers used headlamps to
continuously search the ground surface, only stopping
to gently turn objects that could be easily lifted and
replaced without significant disturbance to the forest
floor in search of the animals.
The forest floor, on and under fallen wood, under
barks, exposed rocks, tree trunks and stumps were
searched for the newts and when encountered captured
by hand. For further analysis, each individual was
placed in buckets with a small amount of water, wet
leaves or moss and they were weighed, measured, and
released at their capture locations. A total of about 80
adult newts were collected from different localities of
Toebisa (n=37), Kabjisa (n=20) and Kazhi (n=23).
3218
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3218–3222

Himalayan Newts in Punakha-Wangdue Valley
J.T. Wangyal & D.B. Gurung
Toebisa area
Gewongs in Punakha
Gewongs in Wangdue Phodrang
Specimens collection area
Figure 1. Study area with Gewogs from where specimens were collected. © Jigme Tshelthrim Wangyal
A steel ruler was used by laying it along the length
of each salamander and total length and snout-ventlength
(SVL) were recorded to the nearest millimetre
(mm). SVL was recorded from the tip of the snout to
the front of the vent (Corkran & Thomas 1996) and the
tail length was calculated. Each newt was weighed in
the bag to the nearest 0.1g with a branded spring scale
and then each bag was weighed separately after the
animal was released. Garmin E-trek GPS was used to
collect the geo-coordinates of all the species collected
and their major habitats.
The identification references used in the field
include Smith (1931, 1935, 1943), Daniels (2005),
Yang & Rao (2008), Ahmed et al. (2009), Fei et al.
(2010), and Vasudevan & Sondhi (2010).
Results
Frost (1985), without any specific location, reported
the presence of Himalayan Newts in Bhutan which
was later confirmed by Palden (2003). After that, there
was no reports on the species from Bhutan. However,
the lack of reports did not mean the species have gone
missing. The newts did exist in the valley but without
the attention of conservationists and academicians.
Therefore, this study further confirms their presence.
This research showed that quite a good number of
the species survive in Toebisa and Kabjisa, Punakha
District, from where it was reported to the world
(Palden 2003) for the first time. Kazhi, another
study site under Wangdue Phodrang also had a good
population of the newts. The highest elevation at
which Himalayan Newts were detected was at 2679m,
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3218–3222
3219

Himalayan Newts in Punakha-Wangdue Valley
at Lampelri Botanical Park, below Dochula while the
lowest was at Toebrongchu Zam, 1255m.
Sex ratio: To look at the sex ratio, males and females
were identified amongst the collected specimens.
The males carry a vertical fissure in the anal region
whereas the females bear a circular opening, a clear
distinction between the sexes keeping confusion out
of question. Of the 37 specimens from Toebisa, 21
were males, while in Kabjisa and Kazhi the number
of males was 10 out of 20 and 13 out of 23 in their
respective collections. While the sex ratio in Kabjisa is
1:1, the males exceeded females in Toebisa and Kazhi
(Fig. 2).
According to a breeding study conducted by Roy
& Mushahidunnabi (2001), oviposition happen in May
and June soon after salamanders emerge from their
hibernation with the first monsoon shower amongst
the permanent and temporary pools, shallow ditches,
marshes and slow-moving streams. In line with their
finding, it is fair to assume that mating and courting
ends by July which means the individual species are
on their own. It can also be assumed that the sex
ratio in the July collection could be skewed due to the
tendency of males and females staying in groups of
their own sex. An all male group of five newts was
collected from Thinleygang at the end of July in 2009
(Image 1) which indicates that the species had stopped
courtship and that they were on their own, looking for
food and shelter.
Habitat affinity: Habitat occupancy was considered
J.T. Wangyal & D.B. Gurung
Figure 2. Ratio of males to females in the three populations
based on the number of species that were collected
from three different kinds of habitat in all three study
sites (Table 1). The Himalayan Salamanders seemed
to like paddy fields, at least during the three months of
June, July and August as most of the specimens were
caught from the paddy field in all three study sites.
Since the study was conducted in July and August,
the specimen collection time probably must have
coincided with the phase of the species when it becomes
aquatic. This is very much in consistence with the
findings of the studies on the species conducted by the
researchers in India who found the species becoming
terrestrial once the rain ceased to fall by the end of
October (Das 1987). It is only during the rains that
the species breeds and remains active. Otherwise, the
species is known to be sluggishly terrestrial, inclined
© Jigme Tshelthrim Wangyal
Image 1. An all male group of five Salamanders from the 2009 collection
3220
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3218–3222

Himalayan Newts in Punakha-Wangdue Valley
J.T. Wangyal & D.B. Gurung
Table 1. Number of specimens collected from different
habitats
Study Areas Roadside Paddy field Forest
Toebisa 7 25 5
Kabjisa 7 10 3
Kazhi 2 18 3
more towards land than water.
Individuals use paddy fields for feeding and
breeding while they use forests and roadsides only for
migration, because maximim numbers were collected
in paddy fields in all three study sites through the
survey in July and August (Fig. 3). Studies in India
have confirmed its egg laying period as the last week
of June on leaves of submersed aquatic plants. The
eggs hatch by the middle of July and by the last week
of August they become big enough for a terrestrial life.
This study conforms with Das (1987). However, the
soil data analysis result which showed the soil to be
basic could not be used due to nonavailability of past
records for comparative analysis.
Personal observations of the animals over the last
few years has revealed that the animals are most active
in June and July when the paddy plantation and weeding
of the fields happen. The newts of this locality are very
active by day, as many could be observed during the
day in the paddy fields. The villages of Lemjikha and
Thinleygang in Toebisa Gewong were scoured mostly
during the day as their paddy fields provided the best
possible sites for catching the salamanders in situ for
morphometric studies.
Association with other species: In this study, the
Himalayan Newts were found along with Polypedates
cf. himalayensis in all three study sites. In Toebisa, the
species found alongside the newts included Xenophrys
cf. nankiangensis, Duttaphrynus melanostictus and
Nanorana liebigii. In Kabjisa, the associates included
D. melanostictus, D. himalayanus and N. liebigii
while in Kazhi, the sympatric species included D.
melanostictus and D. himalayanus.
The sympatric occurrences of Duttaphrynus and
Rana tadpoles, juvenile D. himalayanus and foam
nests of rhacophorid frogs have been observed in Nepal
(Schleich & Kästle 2002). Similarly, the sharing of
aquatic habitat with the metamorphosing Polypedates
cf. himalayensis was observed in Kabjisa. Many other
sympatric species must have been left out owing to the
Figure 3. Comparison of newts’ affinity to different habitats
short duration of the study because the newts cover
extensive areas around the vast paddy fields where
there are chances of getting several species of other
amphibians if a long term study is done.
Distribution: The salamanders were found
in Kabjisa, Barp, Toep, Chhubu, Dzomi, Guma,
Shengana, Talo, and southern Toewang in Punakha
Dzongkhags. The species was not seen in Lingmukha
while Goenshari was not surveyed.
In Wangdue Phodrang, the majority of the animals
were observed in Kazhi, Nahi and Thedtsho while
Gewongs like Bjena, Nyisho, Gangtey, Phangyul
and Rubeisa were not properly surveyed due to time
constraints. The rests of the Gewongs were not even
visited.
This study also shows that Himalayan Salamanders
occur along small seasonal and perennial stream reaches
and paddy fields from 1255–2679m. Therefore, these
habitats (streams and paddy fields) must be conserved.
The traditional paddy farming must continue for the
survival of the species as the fields provide them food,
shelter and home. The distribution map (Fig. 4) shows
the areas where the species were found during the
study. These areas are significant for conservation of
the Himalayan Newts.
Conclusion and Discussions
This study, being the first of its kind in Bhutan is
significant and is an attempt to find the habitats of the
Himalayan Newts in the Punakha-Wangdue Valley.
The species was found to use paddy fields, vernal
pools, streams and forest sides.
A look at the sex ratio revealed that the males
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3218–3222
3221

Himalayan Newts in Punakha-Wangdue Valley
J.T. Wangyal & D.B. Gurung
N
© Jigme Tshelthrim Wangyal
References
W
S
E
Extensive survey areas
Places where newts are found
Figure 4. The distribution of Himalayan newts in the valley
exceeding the females by a small margin, is not a
worrying factor for the species’ survival. By way of
habitat affinity, the newts seemed to like the paddy
fields, at least during the summer when the fields are
being worked for paddy production. Almost all the
specimens came from the paddy fields. Looking at
the association with other species, the Himalayan
Newts were found along with the Polypedates
cf. himalayensis in all three study sites including
other species such as Xenophrys cf. nankiangensis,
Duttaphrynus melanostictus, D. himalayanus and
Nanorana liebigii.
Distribution wise, the study showed that Himalayan
Salamanders occur along small seasonal and perennial
stream reaches and paddy fields from 1255–2679
m. Therefore, these habitats (streams and paddy
fields) must be conserved. The traditional paddy
farming must continue for the survival of the species
as the fields provide food, shelter and home for the
Himalayan Newts.
Ahmed, M.F., A. Das & S.K. Dutta (2009). Amphibians and
Reptiles of Northeast India: A Photographic Guide. Aaranyak,
Society for Biodiversity Conservation. 50 Samanwoy Path,
Survey, Beltola, Guwahati, Assam, India, 168pp.
Campbell, H.W., & S.P. Christman (1982). Field techniques
for herpetofaunal community analysis, pp. 193–200. In:
Scott, N.J. Jr. (ed.). Herpetological Communities. Wildlife
Research Report 13, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish
and Wildlife Service
Corn, P.S. & R.P. Bury (1989). Logging in western Oregon:
responses of headwater habitats and stream amphibians.
Forest Ecology and Management 29: 39–57.
Cockran, C. & C. Thoms (1996). Amphibians of Oregon,
Washington and British Columbia: A Field Identification
Guide. Lone Pine Pub., Edmonton, 175pp.
Daniels, R.J.R. (2005). Amphibians of Peninsular India.
University Press (India) Private Limited. 3-5-819 Hyderguda,
Hyderabad, 169pp.
Das, I. (1987). Natural history of the Indian Salamander.
Herpetofauna News 9: 3.
Fei, L., C. Ye, & J. Jiang (2010). Coloured Atlas of Chinese
Amphibians. Sichuan Publishing Group. Sichuan Publishing
House of Science and Technology, China, 517pp.
Frost, D.R. (1985). Amphibian Species of The World. A
Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Allen Press, Inc.,
and Associations of Systematic Collections, Lawrence,
(iv)+v+732 pp.
Palden, J. (2003). New records of Tylototriton verrucosus
Anderson, 1871 from Bhutan. Hamadryard 27: 286–287.
Roy, D., & Md. Mushahidunnabi (2001). Courtship, mating
and egg-laying in Tylototriton verrucosus from the Darjeeling
District of the Eastern Himalaya. Current Science 81(6):
693–695.
Schleich, H.H. & W. Kästle (eds.) (2002). Amphibians and
Reptiles of Nepal. Biology, Systematics, Field Guide. A.R.G.
Gantner Verlag K.G., Ruggell, Germany. Koenigstein: Koeltz
Scientific Books, 1,200pp.
Smith, M.A. (1931). The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and
Burma: Amphibia and Reptilia, Vol.I. - Loricata, Testudines.
(1 st edition). Taylor and Francis Ltd. London, 185pp.
Smith, M.A. (1935). The fauna of British India, Ceylon and
Burma: Amphibia and Reptilia, Vol.II. - Sauria. (1 st edition).
Taylor and Francis Ltd. London, 440pp.
Smith, M.A. (1943). The fauna of British India, Ceylon and
Burma, including the whole of the Indo - Chinese region.
Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. III. Serpentes. Taylor and
Francis, London, i-xii+583pp+1 map.
Vasudevan, K. & S. Sondhi (2010). Amphibians and Reptiles of
Uttarakhand, India. Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani
18, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India, 94pp.
Yang, D. & D. Rao (2008). Amphibia and Reptilia of Yunnan.
Yunnan Publishing Group Corporation, Yunnan
Science and Technology Press, Kunming (in
Chinese), 12–152pp.
3222
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3218–3222

JoTT No t e 4(13): 3223–3227
Long-horned Beetles (Coleoptera:
Cerambycidae) and Tortoise Beetles
(Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae) of Tripura,
northeastern India with some new
additions
B.K. Agarwala 1 & Partha Pratim Bhattacharjee 2
1,2
Ecology and Biodiversity Laboratories, Department of Zoology,
Tripura University, Suryamaninagar, Tripura 799022, India
Email: 1 bagarwala00@gmail.com (corresponding author),
2
bhattacharjee.pp1977@gmail.com
Members of the family Cerambycidae are
commonly known as Longicorn or Long-horned
Beetles. This family includes a vast assemblage of
phytophagous and xylophagous insects. This is one
of the largest families of Coleoptera and contains
more than 35,000 species under 4,000 genera in 11
subfamilies (Lawrence 1982). The family, though
predominant in tropics, is distributed throughout the
world. The number of cerambycid species recorded
from India is about 1500 (Beeson 1941; Breuning
1960–62, 1963a, 1963b, 1964, 1965, 1966) including
13 species reported from Tripura (Mukhopadhyay &
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Anonymity requested
Manuscript details:
Ms # o2951
Received 19 September 2011
Final received 18 April 2012
Finally accepted 25 August 2012
Citation: Agarwala, B.K. & P.P. Bhattacharjee (2012). Long-horned
Beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) and Tortoise Beetles (Chrysomelidae:
Cassidinae) of Tripura, northeastern India with some new additions. Journal
of Threatened Taxa 4(13): 3223–3227.
Copyright: © B.K. Agarwala & Partha Pratim Bhattacharjee 2012. Creative
Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use
of this article in any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and
distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of
publication.
Acknowledgements: Authors are thankful to ICAR, New Delhi for financial
support through National Project on Insect Biosystematics and to Dr.
V.V. Ramamurthy, Indian Agriculture Research Institute, New Delhi for
encouragements. We also wish to express our gratitude to Dr. H.V. Ghate,
Department of Zoology, Modern College of Arts, Science and Commerce,
Pune for identifying / confirming some of the species reported here.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5CBB5733-6BAE-4064-B445-
46A9DFBFB7B7
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
Biswas 2002). Several new species
have been described since the
above studies, and many are being
documented in Indian territory for
the first time (e.g. Ghate et al. 2006, 2011) and so
the number of cerambycid species found in India may
have changed.
Members of the subfamily Cassidinae
(Chrysomelidae) are popularly known as Tortoise
Beetles. There are 2,760 species of tortoise beetles
known in the world so far (Borowiec 1999) including
450 species recorded from India and four species from
Tripura (Basu 2002). Jacoby (1908), Maulik (1919,
1926), Scherer (1969), Takizawa (1980), Borowiec &
Takizawa (1991) and Borowiec (1999) have produced
monographic works on Indian Chrysomelidae,
including tortoise beetles. In this communication,
11 species of Cerambycidae and seven species of
Cassidinae beetles are reported as new records from
the state of Tripura in India.
Study site
Tripura, one of the border states of northeastern
India, lies between 22 0 55’–24 0 32’N & 91 0 21’–92 0 16’E.
The state has an area of 10,492km 2 with 53.62%
of area under forest cover. Landscape of the state
comprise of low hills covered with moist deciduous
forests dominated by Shorea and Tectona trees with
thick understorey, undulating hillocks covered with
secondary forests dominated by Dipterocarpus trees
and bushes, and agricultural plains dominated by paddy
crop with rain-fed rivers and patches of plantation crops
(jute, tea, rubber) and fruit trees (pineapples, mango,
cashew nuts and jackfruits) (Chakraborty 1989, 2003).
Thus, the landscape of Tripura is very heterogeneous
which provides edge effects and diverse habitat types
for flora and fauna.
Methods
Collections were made during January
2007–December 2010 by frequent visits to forested
and cultivated habitats in different parts of the state.
Collected specimens were identified to species
level following key characters provided by Gahan
(1906), Maulik (1919, 1926), Cherepanov (1990),
Mukhopadhyay & Biswas (2000), Basu (2002)
and Mukhopadhyay & Halder (2004) and also by
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3223–3227 3223

Long-horned and Tortoise beetles
comparison with the identified materials available in
the ecology and biodiversity laboratories, Department
of Zoology, Tripura University where voucher
specimens of species reported here are kept.
Discussion
In the present study, 19 species of Cerambycidae
belonging to three subfamilies were recorded. The
subfamily Lamiinae is found to be dominant with 11
species, followed by Cerambycinae with seven species,
and one species belonged to the subfamily Prioninae.
Eleven of these species are reported here for the first
time from Tripura (Table 1, Images 1–12). In case
of tortoise beetles, eight species were recorded, of
which seven species are reported as new records from
Tripura (Table 2, Images 13–20). Considering the
lack of studies on the Cerambycidae and Cassidinae
insect biodiversity in this region, the findings are very
significant for the understanding of insect biodiversity
in Tripura State and providing baseline data.
References
Basu, C.R. (2002). Insecta: Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae. Fauna
of Tripura, State Fauna Series, Zoological Survey of India
7: 143–164.
Beeson, C.F.C. (1941). The Ecology and Control of Forest
Insects of India and the Adjoining Countries. Government
of India, 767pp.
Borowiec, L. (1999). A World Catalogue of the Cassidinae
(Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Biologia Silesiae, Wroclaw,
Poland, 476pp.
Borowiec, L. & H. Takizawa (1991). Notes on Chrysomelid
beetles (Coleoptera) of India and its neighbouring areas.
Japanese Journal of Entomology 59: 637–654.
Breuning, S. (1960–62). Revision systematique Des especes
du genre Oberea Mulsant du globe. Frustula Entomologica
(Pt. 1, 2, 3): 232pp.
Breuning, S. (1963a). Bestimmungstabella der Lamiiden
Triben nebst Revision der Pteropliini der asiatischen Region
(Col. Ceramb.) 111 Teil. Entomologischen Arbeiten ausdem
Museum G. Frey 14: 168–251.
Breuning, S. (1963b). Bestimmungstabelle der Lamiiden
Triben nebst Revision der Pteropliini der asiatischen Region
(Col. Ceramb.) 111 Teil. Entomologischen Arbeiten ausdem
Museum G. Frey 14: 466–537.
Breuning, S. (1964). Revision der Apomecynini der asiatischaustralischen
Region. Entomologische Abhandlungen
Museum fur Tierkunde in Dresden 30: 528pp.
B.K. Agarwala & P.P. Bhattacharjee
Breuning, S. (1965). Revision der 35 Gattung der Pteropliini der
asiatischen Region (Col. Cerambycidae). Entomologische
Arbeiten aus dem Museum G Frey 16: 161–472.
Breuning, S. (1966). Revision der Agapanthini der eurasiatisch
australischen Region (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae).
Entomologischen Abhandlungen Museum fur Tierkunde in
Dresden 34 (1): 144pp.
Chakraborty, N.K. (1989). Useful plants of Tripura jute fields.
Journal of Economic and Taxonomic Botany 13: 357–366.
Chakraborty, N.K. (2003). Tripurar Upakari Agacha. Jnan
Bichitra Prakashani, Agartala, 160pp.
Cherepanov, A.I. (1990). Cerambycidae of Northern Asia:
Lamiinae - Vol. 3, Part 2. Amerind Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi, 324pp.
Gahan, C.J. (1906). The Fauna of British India including
Ceylon and Burma. Coleoptera: Cerambycidae. Taylor and
Francis, London, 329pp.
Ghate, H.V., M.H. Kichloo & M. Arif (2006). First record of
a cerambycid beetle Purpuricenus kabakovi Miroshnikov
& Lobanov from Kashmir, northern India. Zoos’ Prints
Journal 21(11): 2473–2474.
Ghate, H.V., C.A. Viraktamath & R. Sundararaj (2011). First
report of a Cerambycid beetle (Capnolymma cingalensis)
from India. Taprobanica 3(2): 104–106.
Jacoby, M. (1908). The Fauna of British India including
Ceylon and Burma. Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae. Taylor
and Francis, London, 1: xx+554pp.
Lawrence, J.F. (1982). Coleoptera, pp. 482–553. In: Parker,
S. (ed.). Synopsis and Classification of Living Organisms.
McGraw Hill, New York.
Maulik, S. (1919). The Fauna of British India Including Ceylon
and Burma. Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae (Cassidinae and
Hispinae). Taylor and Francis, London, xii+440pp.
Maulik, S. (1926). The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon
and Burma. Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae (Chrysomelinae
and Halticinae). Taylor and Francis, London, xiii+442pp.
Mukhopadhyay, P. & S. Biswas (2000). Coleoptera:
Cerambycidae, pp. 41–67. In: Director (ed.). Fauna of
Meghalaya, State Fauna Series 4 (Part 5). Zoological
Survey of India Publication.
Mukhopadhyay, P. & S. Biswas (2002). Coleoptera:
Cerambycidae, pp. 139–142. In: Director (ed.). Fauna of
Tripura, State Fauna Series 7 (Part 3). Zoological Survey
of India Publication.
Mukhopadhyay, P. & S.K. Halder (2004). Insecta: Coleoptera:
Cerambycidae, pp. 421–431. In: Director (ed.). Fauna of
Manipur, State Fauna Series 10 (Part 2). Zoological Survey
of India Publication.
Scherer, G. (1969). Die Alticinae des indischen Subkotinentes
(Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Pacific Insects Monographs
22: 1–251.
Takizawa, H. (1980). Immature stages of some Indian Cassidinae
(Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Insecta Matsumurana (New
Series) 21: 19–48.
3224
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3223–3227

Long-horned and Tortoise beetles
B.K. Agarwala & P.P. Bhattacharjee
© Tripura University
© Tripura University
1 2 © Tripura University 3 © Tripura University
4
© Tripura University © Tripura University
5 6 © Tripura University 7 © Tripura University
8
© Tripura University
© Tripura University
9 10 © Tripura University 11 12
© Tripura University
Images 1–12. Cerambycidae beetles.
1 - Aphrodisium cantori (Hope), 2 - Oemospila maculipennis Gahan, 3 - Rosalia decempunctata (Westwood), 4- Batocera
numitor Newman, 5 - Eucomatocera vittata White, 6 - Bander pascoei Lansberge, 7 - Chlorophorus annularis F., 8 - Aristobia
testudo Voet, 9 - Coptops aedificator F., 10 - Epepeotes uncinatus Gahan, 11 - Stibara tetraspilota Hope, 12 - Glenea flava
Jordon.
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3223–3227
3225

Long-horned and Tortoise beetles
B.K. Agarwala & P.P. Bhattacharjee
Table 1. Records of Cerambycidae beetles of Tripura State
Species Distribution in Tripura Reference No.* Remark
Earlier recorded by
Mukhopadhyay & Biswas
(2002)
Records of new
distribution
Superfamily: Cerambycoidea
Family: Cerambycidae
Subfamily: Cerambycinae
1. Anubis inermis (White) Abhya, s. Tripura - ZSI collection + -
2. Aphrodisium cantori (Hope) - Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2673 New Record
3. Chelidonium gibbicole (White) Santibazar, s. Tripura Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2674 -
4. Chlorophorus annularis F.
(=Caloclytus annularis F.)
- Jampui, n. Tripura 2675 New Record
5. Noserius sp. Sikaribari, n. Tripura - ZSI collection + -
6. Oemospila maculipennis Gahan - Jampui, n. Tripura 3125 New Record
7. Rosalia decempunctata (Westwood) - Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2668 New Record
8. Stromatium barbatum F. Ambasa, d. Tripura
9. Xystrocera globosa Olivier
Subfamily: Lamiinae
Belonia, s. Tripura, Belonia,
s. Tripura
Bhubanban, w. Tripura
Trishna WS, s. Tripura
2672 -
Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2679 -
10. Aristobia testudo Voet - Suryamaninagar, w. Tripura 207 New Record
11. Batocera numitor Newman - Jampui, n. Tripura 3126 New Record
12. Centrura sp. Chimbagan, n. Tripura - ZSI collection + -
13. Coptops aedificator F. - Trishna WS, s. Tripura 3127 New Record
14. Epepeotes uncinatus Gahan - Maharani, s. Tripura 3130 New Record
15. Eucomatocera vittata White - Subalsing, w. Tripura 2681 New Record
16. Glenea indiana Thomson
Baramura, w. Tripura,
Abhya, s. Tripura
Mirza, s. Tripura 178 -
17. Glenea assimilis Gahan
Thakachera, Ameupur, s.
Tripura
- ZSI collection + -
18. Glenea flava Jordan - Jampui, n. Tripura 3128 -
19. Macrochenus guerini White Kungmura, s. Tripura Maharani; s. Tripura 3129 -
20. Olenecamptus bilobus F. Agartala, w. Tripura Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2666 -
21. Olenecamptus sp. Sonamura, s. Tripura Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2667 -
22. Oberea posticata Boheman Abhya, s. Tripura - ZSI collection + -
23. Oberea sp. Baramura, w. Tripura - ZSI collection + -
24. Stibara tetraspilota Hope - Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2680 New Record
Subfamily: Prioninae
25. Bander pascoei Lansberge - Trishna WS, s. Tripura 2665 New Record
w. Tripura = west Tripura District; s. Tripura = south Tripura District; n. Tripura = north Tripura District; d. Tripura = Dhalai Tripura District; Trishna WS
= Trishna Wildlife Sanctuary; * Reference collection number (Coleoptera / Cerambycidae- #) of Insect Biosystematics Centre, Department of Zoology,
Tripura University; + As per the information documented in Mukhopadhyay & Biswas (2002).
3226
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3223–3227

Long-horned and Tortoise beetles
© Tripura University © Tripura University
B.K. Agarwala & P.P. Bhattacharjee
© Tripura University
13 14 © Tripura University
15 16
© Tripura University © Tripura University © Tripura University © Tripura University
17 18 19 20
Images 13–20. Cassidinae beetles.
13 - Aspidimorpha dorsata (F.), 14 - Aspidimorpha miliaris (F.), 15 - Aspidimorpha furcata (Thunberg), 16 - Aspidimorpha
sanctaecrucis (F.), 17 - Basiprionota decemmaculata (Boheman), 18 - Cassida sp., 19 - Cassida flavoscutata Spaeth,
20 - Laccoptera nepalensis Boheman
Table 2. Records of Cassidinae beetles of Tripura State
Species Distribution in Tripura Reference No.* Remark
Superfamily: Chrysomeloidea
Family: Chrysomelidae
Subfamily: Cassidinae
Earlier recorded by
Basu (2002)
Record of new
distribution
1. Aspidimorpha dorsata (F.) - Jampui, n. Tripura 3231 New Record
2. Aspidimorpha furcata (Thunberg) - Salema, d. Tripura 76 New Record
3. Aspidimorpha miliaris (F.) - Jampui, n. Tripura 3232 New Record
4. Aspidimorpha sanctaecrucis (F.) - Pandabpur, w. Tripura 79 New Record
5. Basiprionota decemmaculata (Boheman) - Jampui, n. Tripura 3233 New Record
6. Cassida catenata Boheman
Bagma, Shalgara,
s. Tripura
- ZSI collection + -
7. Cassida circumdata Herbst Barpathari, s. Tripura - ZSI collection + -
8. Cassida flavoscutata Spaeth - Bagabasa, s. Tripura 77 New Record
9. Cassida sp. - Jampui, n. Tripura 3234 -
10. Chiridopsis scalaris (Weber) Belonia, s. Tripura - ZSI collection + -
11. Laccoptera nepalensis Boheman - Jampui, n. Tripura 3235 New Record
12. Laccoptera quadrimaculata (Thunberg)
Ambassa, Dulubari,
d. Tripura
- ZSI collection + -
w. Tripura = west Tripura; s. Tripura = south Tripura; n. Tripura = north Tripura; d. Tripura = dhalai Tripura; * Reference collection number (Coleoptera /
Chrysomelidae- #) of Insect Biosystematics Centre, Department of Zoology, Tripura University; + As per the information documented in Basu (2002)
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3223–3227
3227

JoTT No t e 4(13): 3228–3232
Studies on bird diversity of Overa-
Aru Wildlife Sanctuary of Jammu and
Kashmir, India
Sameer Ahmad Khah 1 , R.J. Rao 2 & Khursheed
Ahmad Wani 3
1,2
Department of Environmental Science, Jiwaji University,
Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh 474011, India
3
Department of Environmental Science, ITM University, Gwalior,
Madhya Pradesh 474001, India
Email: 1 samkhahevs@gmail.com, 2 soszool@rediffmail.com,
3
wanikhursheed83@gmail.com (corresponding author)
The Overa-Aru Wildlife Sanctuary (WS) is one
of the most important protected areas of the state of
Jammu and Kashmir and lies within the distribution
range of the endangered Hangul Cervus elaphus
hanglu. This Sanctuary is the habitat of different
species of birds during different seasons. The avian
diversity of the state varies seasonally and available
data suggests the existence of 358 species of birds
belonging to 179 genera, 51 families under 16 orders.
Eight species of sympatric warblers, Simla Black Tit
Parus rufonuchalis, Rufous-belled Crested Tit Parus
rubidiventris, Crested Black Tit Parus melanolophus
were abundant, found close to the tree line, and breed
Date of publication (online): 26 October 2012
Date of publication (print): 26 October 2012
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Rajiv S. Kalsi
Manuscript details:
Ms # o2899
Received 02 August 2011
Final received 16 June 2012
Finally accepted 14 September 2012
Citation: Khah, S.K., R.J. Rao & K.A. Wani (2012). Studies on bird diversity
of Overa-Aru Wildlife Sanctuary of Jammu and Kashmir, India. Journal of
Threatened Taxa 4(13): 3228–3232.
Copyright: © Sameer Ahmad Khah, R.J. Rao & Khursheed Ahmad Wani
2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows
unrestricted use of this article in any medium for non-profit purposes,
reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors
and the source of publication.
Acknowledgements: The authors are indebted to Chief Wildlife Warden,
Department of Wildlife Protection Jammu and Kashmir, officers and field
staff for their cooperation and support. We are highly thankful to Head
Department of Zoology, Jiwaji University, Gwalior for providing all the
facilities for the present work.
ZooBank urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D50D6B54-3BF6-4B43-B3E7-
CE683EA52456
OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD
in the Overa-Aru (Price & Jamdar
1989, 1990, 1991). However,
Stattersfield et al. (1998) have
reported 11 restricted range
species, four or more of which have been found in the
sanctuary. Birdlife International (2001) reported that
the only threatened species in Overa-Aru WS is the
Kashmir Flycatcher Ficedula subrubla, a restricted
range species and it was found wintering in Sri Lanka
and in the Western Ghats (Ali & Ripley 1987). The
present study is an attempt to list the bird species
of Overa-Aru WS, which can be useful as baseline
information for future conservation and management
of the habitat.
Study Area
This study was carried out in the Overa-Aru Wildlife
Sanctuary located in the Himalayan biogeographical
zone to the southeast of Srinagar, with the southern
boundary at Pahalgam in Anantnag District (Image
1). It is a famous tourist attraction in this region.
The Sanctuary lies in Lidder Valley Forest Division
surrounded by Sindh Forest Division in the north;
Lidder Forest in the south; Pahalgam in the east; and
Dachigam National Park in the west. The Sanctuary
is located at an altitude of 2100–5425 m between
34 0 11’18”N & 75 0 18’40”E (Bhatt & Bhargava 2005).
The Sanctuary is named after two villages, Overa
and Aru (Suhail 2000). Overa-Aru is an old sanctuary
declared under Dogra rule in 1945. At that time the
Sanctuary covered only 32km 2 which was later extended
to 392km 2 when Aru forest was included in the year
1981. Initially, the same order designated the area as
a biosphere reserve of 425km 2 under the “Man and
Biosphere Programme”, but neither the Government
of India nor UNESCO accepted the designation and
finally the State Government declared the whole area
as a wildlife sanctuary (Suhail 2000). The dominant
trees species were Cedrus deodara, Pinus griffithii,
Abies pindrow, Aesculus indica etc. The major shrub
species were Indigofera heterantha, Viburnum sp.,
Sorbaria tomentosa etc. The ground cover was very
rich and dicotyledonous herbs dominated, comprising
of Rumex patientia, Primula sp., Anemone sp.
Methods
Birds were surveyed for about one week every
3228
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3228–3232

Birds of Overa-Aru
S.A. Khah et al.
Figure 1. Study area
month from October 2010 to June 2011. The surveys
were conducted on foot and observations were made
with 7–21x40 binoculars, mainly in the morning and
evening. Grimmett et al. (1998) and Ali & Ripley
(1987) were used for identification, and in many
cases photographs were taken in order to confirm the
identification.
For the present study, eight study sites were selected,
four of which were in the Overa part and the other four
from the Aru part of the sanctuary. The study sites
were selected and surveyed on the basis of harbouring
varied biodiversity. Frequent occurrence of different
bird species in these areas during spring and summer
seasons was another reason for the selection of these
areas. The birds were categorised into abundant or
very common, common and fairly common based
on their abundance and their feeding habits as in Ali
& Ripley (1987). Various research advisors, local
communities, field staff of Overa-Aru WS and other
key organizations were consulted during the study
period for data collection.
Bird species diversity and evenness
Species diversity was calculated using the Shannon-
Weiner Diversity Index (Shannon & Weaver 1949).
s
H = – ∑ p i
log p i
i=1
Where i =1
H - Symbol for the diversity in a sample of S species
S - The number of species in the sample
Pi - relative abundance of ith species measured, =
n i
/N
N - Total number of individuals of all species
n i
- number of individuals of ith species
log - natural log
Results and Discussion
The avifauna of the Overa-Aru WS includes a
large number of birds both resident and migratory.
Resident as well as migratory birds were found in the
lower areas from March–September. A total of 702
individual birds representing 29 species, 22 families
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3228–3232
3229

Birds of Overa-Aru
and five orders, were observed from the sanctuary
during the study (Table 1). Family Motacillidae
had the highest number of species (six) followed by
Sturnidae, Muscicapidae, Passeridae, Columbidae with
two species each. Fifteen families were represented
by single species each (Appendix 1).
Price et al. (2003) reported a list of 70 species of
birds in the Overa-Aru WS in contrast to 117 bird
species recorded in or around the sanctuary. Eighty
nine species breed within its boundaries as listed by
Price & Jamdar (1990).
More than 70% of the birds were breeding
residents in the Overa-Aru WS. Species such as
Rock Bunting E. cia, Jungle Crow C. macrorhynchos,
Common Stonechat Saxicola torquatus, Oriental
Turtle Dove Streptopelia orientalis, Russet Sparrow
Passer rutilans and various species of warblers were
found breeding in the lower areas of the sanctuary.
Price & Jamdar (1989, 1991) reported eight species of
sympatric warblers breeding in Overa-Aru.
Among foraging groups, the bird community of
insectivores dominated, representing more than 72%
of the species and 65% of the individuals. Omnivores
comprised more than 10% of the species and 22% of
the individuals while granivores represented more
than 10% of the species and 8% of the individuals.
Carnivores and frugivores were least represented in
this study of avian community of Overa-Aru WS.
Diversity Indices of both resident and migratory
birds of Overa-Aru were calculated by the Shannon-
Wiener method (Fig. 1). The species diversity index
fluctuated from 0.097 (site-1) to 0.064 (site-5). The
highest diversity was shown in site-1, while site-5 had
S.A. Khah et al.
the lowest diversity. Apart from the diversity, species
evenness has shown variation in the first five sites with
values of 0.061 (site-2), 0.073 (site-1), 0.067 (site-3),
0.051 (site-4) and 0.044 (site-5) with respect to each
other. Site-6, site-7 and site-8 have shown almost the
same species evenness to each other. The variation in
species diversity and species evenness at various sites
may be due to the influx of tourists, vehicles and local
people in and near the sanctuary and the availability
of food to the birds. The Overa-Aru WS is located
at Pahalgam which is a tourist hub in Jammu and
Kashmir.
The anthropogenic activities such as parking lots,
housing developments and agricultural fields may
have changed the diversity in the area which is well
reflected by the species composition before human
intervention (Sax & Gaines 2003).
REFERENCES
Ali, S. & S.D. Ripley (1987). Compact Handbook of the Birds
of India and Pakistan (2nd edition). Oxford University
Press, Delhi, 72–92.
Bhatt, S.C. & G.K. Bhargava (2005). Land and People of
Indian States and Union Territories - Vol. II. Jammu &
Kashmir. Kalpas Publication, Delhi, 60pp.
Birdlife International (2001). Threatened Birds of Asia - Red
Data Book. Birdlife International, Cambridge, 2214–2216.
Grimmett, R., C. Inskipp & T. Inskipp (1998). Birds of The
Indian Subcontinent. Oxford University Press, Delhi, 591–
615pp.
Price, T. & N. Jamdar (1989). Where Eight Leaf Warblers
Breed. Hornbill 2: 7–11.
Price, T. & N. Jamdar (1990). The Breeding birds of Overa
Where H’= Shannon-Weiner diversity index, E’=H’/ln (s)
Figure 1. Shannon diversity index and evenness of birds in Overa-Aru Wildlife Sanctuary
3230
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3228–3232

Birds of Overa-Aru
S.A. Khah et al.
Table 1. The migratory status, feeding habits, abundance and status of avifauna of Overa-Aru Wildlife Sanctuary
Scientific name
Common name
Migratory
status
Feeding
habit
1 Corvus macrorhynchos Jungle Crow R,A O 2
2 Sturnus vulgaris Common Starling W,P,M,R* F 1
3 Acridotheres tristis Common Myna W,A,M I 2
4 Saxicola torquatus Common Stone Chat R,M,P I 2
5 Rhyacornis fuliginosa Plumbeous Water-redstart R O 1
6 Passer rutilans Russet Sparrow A G 3
7 Motacilla citreola Citrine Wagtail (Image 2) M I 2
8 Streptopelia orientalis Oriental Turtle Dove R,M,W G 3
9 Myophonus caeruleus Blue Whistling Thrush A,M I 1
10 Pycnonotus leucogenys Himalayan Bulbul R• I 2
11 Emberiza cia Rock Bunting A,M I 2
12 Columba livia Rock Pigeon R,A G 1
13 Motacilla alba White Wagtail (Image 3) A,M I 2
14 Motacilla cinerea Grey Wagtail (Image 4) A,M,W I 2
15 Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail (Image 5) B,W,P I 1
16 Anthus roseatus Rosy Pipit A,M,W I 2
17 Prunella rubeculoides Robin Accentor A I 3
18 Lanius schach Long Tailed Shrike R•,M I 2
19 Phylloscopus occipitalis Western Crowned Warbler M I 1-3
20 Gyps himalayensis Himalayan Griffon Vulture A C 3
21 Phylloscopus affinis Tickell's Leaf Warbler M I 1
22 Carduelis spinoides Yellow Breasted Green Finch A I 2
23 Upupa epops Common Hoopoe R,B,W I 2
24 Parus major Great Tit R,A I 1
25 Dendrocopos himalayensis Himalayan Woodpecker N,A I 2
26 Anthus trivialis Tree Pipit M,P,W I 3
27 Terpsiphone paradisi Asian Paradise Flycatcher R•,M,P I 3
28 Rhyacornis fuliginosa Plumbeous Water Redstart A I 2
Migratory status: R - residential, W - winter visitor, A - altitudinal migrant, P - passage migrant, M - migrates within the subcontinent, N - near
endemic, * - localised or patchily distributed, • - subject to some seasonal movement or wandering.
Feeding habit: P - Piscivores, H - Herbivores, O - Omnivores, C - Carnivores, I - Insectivores, G - Granivores, F - Frugivores
Status: 1 - abundant or very common, 2 - common, 3 - fairly common
Status
© Sameer Ahmad Khah © Sameer Ahmad Khah © Sameer Ahmad Khah
1
Image 2. Citrine Wagtail Motacilla
citreola
Image 3. White Wagtail Motacilla alba
Image 4. Grey Wagtail Motacilla
cinerea
1
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3228–3232
3231

Birds of Overa-Aru
S.A. Khah et al.
Appendix 1. Site wise population of birds in Overa-Aru Wildlife Sanctuary
Scientific name Family Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6 Site 7 Site 8 Total
1 Corvus macrorhynchos Corvidae 4 2 7 8 7 6 10 44
2 Sturnus vulgaris Sturnidae 1 8 2 2 1 3 17
3 Acridotheres tristis Sturnidae 2 6 4 3 9 4 9 37
4 Saxicola torquatus Muscicapidae 3 4 2 9
5 Rhyacornis fuliginosa Muscicapidae 10 8 4 10 4 6 2 6 50
6 Oriolus oriolus Oriolidae 7 4 9 8 2 8 23
7 Passer rutilans Passeridae 2 5 3 5 5 3 4 27
8 Passer domesticus Passeridae 3 2 3 2 2 12
9 Motacilla citreola Motacillidae 1 3 7 2 4 17
10 Motacilla alba Motacillidae 8 6 2 9 2 5 32
11 Motacilla cinerea Motacillidae 4 5 3 2 14
12 Motacilla flava Motacillidae 2 3 2 4 1 7 3 3 25
13 Anthus roseatus Motacillidae 5 6 3 4 5 5 1 2 29
14 Anthus trivialis Motacillidae 3 2 4 2 3 13 3 30
15 Myophonus caeruleus Turdidae 2 1 2 2 2 4 3 3 19
16 Pycnonotus leucogenys Pycnonotidae 2 1 2 1 7 7 2 5 27
17 Emberiza cia Emberizidae 2 2 2 1 2 2 11
18 Prunella rubeculoides Prunellidae 2 3 2 1 4 2 2 16
19 Terpsiphone paradisi Monarchidae 2 3 2 3 2 1 3 17
20 Parus major Paridae 2 1 1 1 2 7
21 Lanius schach Laniidae 25 13 15 4 3 60
22 Carduelis spinoides Fringillidae 2 8 3 4 2 19
23 Phylloscopus occipitalis Phylloscopidae 3 1 2 2 2 10
24 Phylloscopus affinis Phylloscopidae 1 1 2 1 4 3 2 2 16
25 Streptopelia orientalis Columbidae 2 2 1 1 1 4 1 1 13
26 Columba livia Columbidae 1 6 4 2 12 2 6 33
27 Gyps himalayensis Accipitridae 1 2 1 1 4
28 Upupa epops Upupidae 2 2 4 2 8 2 20
29 Dendrocopos himalayensis Picidae 20 10 4 8 3 6 3 10 64
Total 101 86 66 83 107 117 61 93 702
Wildlife Sanctuary, Kashmir. Journal of the Bombay National History Society
© Sameer Ahmad Khah
87: 1–15.
Price, T. & N. Jamdar (1991). Breeding of eight species of phylloscopus warblers
in Kashmir. Journal of the Bombay National History Society 88: 242–255.
Price, T., J. Zee, K. Jamdar & N. Jamdar (2003). Bird species diversity along
the Himalaya: a comparison of Himachal Pradesh with Kashmir. Journal of the
Bombay Natural History Society 100: 394–410.
Shannon, C.E. & W. Weaver (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication.
University of Illinois Press, 117pp.
Sax, D.F. & D. Steven (2003). Gaines Species diversity: from global decreases to
local increases. TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution 18: 561–566.
1 Image 5. Yellow Wagtail Motacilla
Stattersfield, A.J., A.J. Crosby, D.C. Long & Wege (1998). Endemic Bird Areas flavia
of The World Priorities for Biodiversity conservation. BirdLife International,
Cambridge, U.K., 19–26pp.
Suhail, I. (2000). Overa-Aru Wildlife Sanctuary: Management Plan: 2001–2006.
Department of Wildlife Protection, Srinagar, 508–510pp.
3232
Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | October 2012 | 4(13): 3228–3232

Dr. Pankaj Kumar, Tai Po, Hong Kong
Dr. Krushnamegh Kunte, Cambridge, USA
Prof. Dr. Adriano Brilhante Kury, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Dr. P. Lakshminarasimhan, Howrah, India
Dr. Carlos Alberto S de Lucena, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Dr. Glauco Machado, São Paulo, Brazil
Dr. Gowri Mallapur, Mamallapuram, India
Dr. George Mathew, Peechi, India
Prof. Richard Kiprono Mibey, Eldoret, Kenya
Dr. Lionel Monod, Genève, Switzerland
Dr. Shomen Mukherjee, Jamshedpur, India
Dr. P.O. Nameer, Thrissur, India
Dr. D. Narasimhan, Chennai, India
Dr. T.C. Narendran, Kozhikode, India
Mr. Stephen D. Nash, Stony Brook, USA
Dr. K.S. Negi, Nainital, India
Dr. K.A.I. Nekaris, Oxford, UK
Dr. Heok Hee Ng, Singapore
Dr. Boris P. Nikolov, Sofia, Bulgaria
Prof. Annemarie Ohler, Paris, France
Dr. Shinsuki Okawara, Kanazawa, Japan
Dr. Albert Orr, Nathan, Australia
Dr. Geeta S. Padate, Vadodara, India
Dr. Larry M. Page, Gainesville, USA
Dr. Arun K. Pandey, Delhi, India
Dr. Prakash Chand Pathania, Ludhiana, India
Dr. Malcolm Pearch, Kent, UK
Dr. Richard S. Peigler, San Antonio, USA
Dr. Rohan Pethiyagoda, Sydney, Australia
Mr. J. Praveen, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Mark R Stanley Price, Tubney, UK
Dr. Robert Michael Pyle, Washington, USA
Dr. Muhammad Ather Rafi, Islamabad, Pakistan
Dr. H. Raghuram, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Dwi Listyo Rahayu, Pemenang, Indonesia
Dr. Sekar Raju, Suzhou, China
Dr. Vatsavaya S. Raju, Warangal, India
Dr. V.V. Ramamurthy, New Delhi, India
Dr (Mrs). R. Ramanibai, Chennai, India
Prof. S.N. Ramanujam, Shillong, India
Dr. Alex Ramsay, LS2 7YU, UK
Dr. M.K. Vasudeva Rao, Pune, India
Dr. Robert Raven, Queensland, Australia
Dr. K. Ravikumar, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Luke Rendell, St. Andrews, UK
Dr. Anjum N. Rizvi, Dehra Dun, India
Dr. Leif Ryvarden, Oslo, Norway
Prof. Michael Samways, Matieland, South Africa
Dr. Yves Samyn, Brussels, Belgium
Dr. Asok K. Sanyal, Kolkata, India
Dr. K.R. Sasidharan, Coimbatore, India
Dr. Kumaran Sathasivam, India
Dr. S. Sathyakumar, Dehradun, India
Dr. M.M. Saxena, Bikaner, India
Dr. Hendrik Segers, Vautierstraat, Belgium
Dr. R. Siddappa Setty, Bengaluru, India
Dr. Subodh Sharma, Towson, USA
Prof. B.K. Sharma, Shillong, India
Prof. K.K. Sharma, Jammu, India
Dr. R.M. Sharma, Jabalpur, India
Dr. Tan Koh Siang, Kent Ridge Road, Singapore
Dr. Arun P. Singh, Jorhat, India
Dr. Lala A.K. Singh, Bhubaneswar, India
Prof. Willem H. De Smet, Wilrijk, Belgium
Mr. Peter Smetacek, Nainital, India
Dr. Humphrey Smith, Coventry, UK
Dr. Hema Somanathan, Trivandrum, India
Dr. C. Srinivasulu, Hyderabad, India
Dr. Ulrike Streicher, Danang, Vietnam
Dr. K.A. Subramanian, Pune, India
Mr. K.S. Gopi Sundar, New Delhi, India
Dr. P.M. Sureshan, Patna, India
Prof. R. Varatharajan, Imphal, India
Dr. Karthikeyan Vasudevan, Dehradun, India
Dr. R.K. Verma, Jabalpur, India
Dr. W. Vishwanath, Manipur, India
Dr. E. Vivekanandan, Cochin, India
Dr. Gernot Vogel, Heidelberg, Germany
Dr. Ted J. Wassenberg, Cleveland, Australia
Dr. Stephen C. Weeks, Akron, USA
Prof. Yehudah L. Werner, Jerusalem, Israel
Mr. Nikhil Whitaker, Mamallapuram, India
Dr. Hui Xiao, Chaoyang, China
Dr. April Yoder, Little Rock, USA
English Editors
Mrs. Mira Bhojwani, Pune, India
Dr. Fred Pluthero, Toronto, Canada
Journal of Threatened Taxa is indexed/abstracted
in Bibliography of Systematic Mycology, Biological
Abstracts, BIOSIS Previews, CAB Abstracts, EBSCO,
Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Index Fungorum
and Zoological Records.
NAAS rating (India) 4.5

Jo u r n a l o f Th r e a t e n e d Ta x a
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
October 2012 | Vol. 4 | No. 13 | Pages 3161–3232
Date of Publication 26 October 2012 (online & print)
Communications
Fish diversity and assemblage structure in Ken
River of Panna landscape, central India
-- J.A. Johnson, Ravi Parmar, K. Ramesh, Subharanjan
Sen & R. Sreenivasa Murthy, Pp. 3161–3172
CEPF Western Ghats Special Series
Local ecological knowledge of the threatened
Cochin Forest Cane Turtle Vijayachelys silvatica and
Travancore Tortoise Indotestudo travancorica from
the Anamalai Hills of the Western Ghats, India
-- Arun Kanagavel & Rajeev Raghavan, Pp. 3173–3182
Status and conservation of Eastern Hoolock Gibbon
Hoolock leuconedys in Assam, India
-- Rekha Chetry, Dilip Chetry & P.C.Bhattacharjee,
Pp. 3183–3189
Studies on taxonomy and distribution of Acridoidea
(Orthoptera) of Bihar, India
-- Mohd. Kamil Usmani & Md. Rashid Nayeem,
Pp. 3190–3204
Notes
First record of Resseliella salvadorae (Rao) (Diptera:
Cecidomyiidae) and its parasitoid from stem and leaf
galls of Salvadora persica L. Sudan
-- E.M. Moawia, S.I. Ensaf & R.M. Sharma, Pp. 3215–
3217
The distribution of Himalayan Newts, Tylototriton
verrucosus in the Punakha-Wangdue Valley, Bhutan
-- Jigme Tshelthrim Wangyal & Dhan Bahadhur Gurung,
Pp. 3218–3222
Long-horned Beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae)
and Tortoise Beetles (Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae) of
Tripura, northeastern India with some new additions
-- B.K. Agarwala & Partha Pratim Bhattacharjee, Pp.
3223–3227
Studies on bird diversity of Overa-Aru Wildlife
Sanctuary of Jammu and Kashmir, India
-- Sameer Ahmad Khah, R.J. Rao & Khursheed Ahmad
Wani, Pp. 3228–3232
Short Communication
CEPF Western Ghats Special Series
Diversity of rhacophorids (Amphibia: Anura) in
Parambikulam Tiger Reserve, Western Ghats, Kerala,
India
-- K.M. Jobin & P.O. Nameer, Pp. 3205–3214
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT 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.