View - Journal of Threatened Taxa

November 2012 | Vol. 4 | No. 14 | Pages 3233–3376Date of Publication 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)© Manju SiliwalNeoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov.Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of articles in any mediumfor non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and thesource of publication.

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.© Manju Siliwal © Manju SiliwalImage 1. Female of Neoheterophrictus crurofulvus sp. nov.(Paratype, WILD-09-ARA-420)Image 2. Male of Neoheterophrictus crurofulvus sp. nov.(WILD-09-ARA-472)Figure 1. Neoheterophrictus crurofulvus sp. nov., female (WILD-10-ARA-1067). A - Carapace and abdomen dorsal view;B - Eye; C - Sternum, maxillae, labium, chelicerae; D - Chelicerae prolateral view; E - Maxillae, retrolateral view; F - Coxa I,prolateral view; G - Coxa I, retrolateral view; H - Spinnerets; I - Spermathecae. Scale 1.0mm for B-I and scale 0.5mm for A.small or minute lobes at apex resembling inflorescenceof flower; legs, chelicerae, margins of carapace andventral and lateral sides of abdomen coffee brown, restblack in life (Image 1).Male of the new species differs by primary tibialspur narrowing down gradually towards apex withpointed spine at the tip; absence of thick spine at thebase of primary tibial spur (Fig. 2J) on retrolateralaspect; distal two-third of metatarsi and complete tarsiof all legs is white (Image 2).3236Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.Table 1. Neoheterophrictus crurofulvus sp. nov., measurements of legs and palp of female Holotype (WILD-10-ARA-1067). Ranges and mean include all mature female specimens(n=5, holotype and paratypes) collected from Uttara KannadaLeg I Leg II Leg III Leg IV PalpHT* 067 Range Mean±SD HT* Range Mean±SD HT* Range Mean±SD HT* Range Mean±SD HT* Range Mean±SDFemur 7.90 6.38–8.59 7.72±0.85 7.03 5.39–7.36 6.74±0.82 6.45 5.82–6.92 6.44±0.46 9.05 8.37–10.0 9.16±0.71 5.98 5.47–6.10 5.78±0.26Patella 5.48 4.85–5.93 5.38±0.46 4.42 3.98–4.71 4.43±0.28 4.14 3.37–4.32 4.06±0.39 5.27 3.67–5.32 4.48±0.68 3.90 3.53–4.18 3.81±0.28Tibia 5.59 5.59–6.48 6.05±0.36 4.14 4.14–4.67 4.37±0.20 4.02 2.69–4.48 3.64±0.67 7.30 5.76–7.43 6.90±0.68 3.66 3.35–4.2 3.71±0.34Metatarsus 4.19 4.01–4.29 4.15±0.11 4.35 3.5–4.63 4.06±0.45 5.16 4.62–5.46 5.01±0.34 8.99 8.24–8.99 8.58±0.28 - - -Tarsus 3.25 2.37–3.25 2.68±0.35 3.40 2.38–3.4 2.87±0.44 3.51 2.59–3.51 3.01±0.39 4.54 3.22–4.54 3.65±0.52 4.28 3.23–4.28 3.59±0.40Total 26.41 23.81–27.81 25.97±1.68 23.34 19.77–24.58 22.47±1.80 23.28 21.21–23.28 22.16±0.80 35.15 29.26–35.6 33.12±2.44 17.82 15.94–18 16.89±0.98MidwidthFemur 2.18 1.55–2.18 1.90±0.23 2.14 1.51–2.14 1.88±0.23 2.2 1.94–2.4 2.17±0.21 1.89 1.63–1.94 1.84±0.12 1.7 1.3–1.74 1.54±0.20Tibia 2 1.57–2.33 1.89±0.29 1.59 1.47–1.92 1.63±0.17 1.7 1.32–1.71 1.58±0.16 1.6 1.4–1.84 1.60±0.16 1.78 1.38–1.78 1.58±0.141 distal ventral, 2 distal ventrolateral.Trichobothria: Tarsi: I, 30 clavate, 16 long and shortfiliform; II, 30 clavate, 24 long and short filiform; III,24 clavate, 24 long and short filiform; IV, 14 clavate,20 long and short filiform; palp, 23 clavate, 12 longand short filiform. Clavate on I-IV in distal threequartersin two rows; filiforms only in basal threequarters.Short epitrichobothrial hair field on tarsi aswide as clavates and uniform height for length.Coxae (Figs. 1F-G): Coxal bases dorsally easilyseen from above (Image 1). I longest, about 1.33times length of II; IV clearly widest and basally withanterior corner distinct, edge curves dorsally, roundedat interface. Coxae ventrally with short golden brownhair, weak thorns present on prolateral faces of I-IIand very much reduced on III-IV, sparsely distributedin basal one half portion on coxae I, one fourth basalon coxae II, very few on proventral basal edge; abovesuture thick blackish-brown long thick stiff setaealong with brush of fine grey hair on leg I-II, on III-IV reduced to a few setae. I-IV ventrally coveredwith golden brown mat of small hairs at base of coxa,long and short black and pallid hair, all coxae slopingbackward. Retrolateral setation: I-III with mediannarrow light thin brush of pallid hair, IV glabrous.Leg pilosity: Leg III-IV, tibia to tarsi covered withlong hairs, leg IV appears incrassate. Femorae of alllegs have pallid brush like long hair ventrally. Alllegs covered with mat of greenish-brown short hair.Number of long hairs extending well above base layer,I: pa, v=4; ti, d=4, p=3, v=8, r=2; mt, d=5, p=4, v=3,r-2; ta, d=2. II: pa, d=2, v=4; ti, d=7, p=4, v=8, r=3;mt, d=9, p=2, v=5, r=3; ta, d=2. III: pa, d=5, p=6, v=3,r=6; ti, d=7, p=12, v=26, r=16; mt, d=18, p=7, v=21,r=14; ta, d=2, p=2, r=2. IV: pa, d=8, p=10, v=4, r=17;ti, d=28, p=32, v=24, r=48; mt, d=38, p=40, v=34,r=80; ta, d=24, p=14, r=36.Scopulae: Entire on all tarsi, divided with setae,division broader distally; ta I, divided centrally with2–3 setae (distally with band of 6–8 setae), ta II-III,divided with band of 3–4 (distally 12–16) setae, ta IV,divided with band of 5–6 (distally 16–20) setae; mt I,distal three-quarters; mt II, distal half; mt III-IV, distalquarter, scanty. Metatarsi scopulae intermixed withlong black hair and bristles. No scopula on proventraltibiae.Tarsal weakness: Not prominent.Claws: Paired claws on leg I-IV without dentition3238Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.Figure 2. Neoheterophrictus crurofulvus sp. nov., male (WILD-09-ARA-472).A - Carapace and abdomen dorsal view; B - Eye; C - Sternum, maxillae, labium, chelicerae; D - Chelicerae prolateral view; E- Maxillae, retrolateral view; F - Coxa I, prolateral view; G - Coxa I, retrolateral view; H - Spinnerets; I - Tibial spur, prolateralview; J - Tibial spur, retrolateral view. Scale 1.0mm for B–J and scale 0.5mm for A.larger than rest, PME smaller than anterior eyes. Eyeson ocular tubercle. Eye diameter: ALE, 0.35; AME,0.29; PLE, 0.27; PME, 0.25. Distance between eyes:AME-AME, 0.12; PME-PLE, adjacent; AME-ALE,0.05; PME-PME, 0.58. Ocular Quadrate, 0.66 long,1.20 wide. MOQ: length, 0.58; front width, 0.80; backwidth, 0.95; difference between back and front width,0.15. Clypeus very narrow.Maxillae (Fig. 2C,E): 2.64 long in front, 3.72 longin back, 1.83 wide. Posterior edge near heel concave,anterior lobe distinct, serrula absent, long bristlespresent; posterior ventral edge straight. Cuspules: ca.190 in anterior corner in triangle region. Prolateralface, scattered short and long hair present, few shortstiff hair above maxillary suture, setae and bristlesabsent. Retrolateral face reddish-orange, glabrous incentre with thin short (stiff black bristles) spines ondistal quarter, posterior and retroventral edge.Labium (Fig. 2C): 0.89 long, 1.34 wide; ca. 80cuspules in band for one-fourth of length anteriorly;cuspules similar in size to those on maxillae. Basalgroove shallow, distinct. Labiosternal groove convex.One pair of large sigilla present in labiosternalgroove.Chelicerae (Fig. 2D): 5.53 long, intercheliceralspines absent. Chelicerae lyra absent. Prolateral, notsmooth, band with faint ridges (at the half way pointof band), sparsely covered with hairs running oncurved chelicerae shape in just below dorso-prolateralface with 3-4 stiff bristles at base; retrolateral facesglabrous, reddish-brown; 16 promarginal and 39basomesal teeth in 2-4 rows. Rastellum present, not asprominent as in female, 18 short and long thick, curvedbristle-like spines in 2-3 rows on dorsoprolateral edgeof chelicerae.Sternum (Fig. 2C): 4.62 long, 4.39 wide. Slightlyoval (more roundish), broader posteriorly, high incentre, sloping gradually, covered with long and shortbrown hair. Posterior angle short and blunt and notseparating coxae IV. Posterior edge clearly seen. Afew scattered small pallid hair covering base of sternumlike mat but not dense and not covering sternum. 2-33240Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusrows of long black bristle-like hair present on marginsposteriorly. Pedicle pallid, not seen properly.Sigilla (Fig. 2C): Three pairs, posterior sigilla,oval, 0.37 diameter, ca. 1.41 apart, 0.60 from margin;median sigilla, oval, 0.29 diameter, 3.24 apart, 0.12from margin; anterior, very small, round, marginal.Legs (Figs. 2I-J): Formula 4123. All legs almostsubequal in thickness. Basifemoral thorns absent onall. Mat of short feather hair (Image 2, resemblingscopulae hair) present on prolateral side of distal halfof coxae, trochanter to basal half of patella of leg I andon retrolateral side of distal half of coxae, trochanterto tibia of palp (not as dense as on leg I). Mt IV 2.98times longer than ta IV, rest 2.00-2.40 times longerthan ta. Tibial apophysis consists of two spursventrally, primary spur on ventro-retrolateral surface,long, gradually narrowing down slightly towards apex,with prominent spine at tip; secondary spur on ventroprolateralaspect of primary spur, rounded at apex withnumerous bristles, hairs and a few tubercles on theinner side of it, long curved spine emerge at base ofsecondary spur, covering spur on its retrolateral aspect.No granules or spines present between two spurs.Spines: I: ti, v=2 spur, each with pointed spine;M. Siliwal et al.mt, v=1. II: ti, p=1, v=3; mt, p=1, v=3. III: ti, p=r=1,v=4; mt, p=r=2, v=5. IV: ti, p=3, r=1, v=4; mt, p=r=3,v=5. Spines on distal metatarsi: I, 1 ventral; II, 2ventrolateral; III-IV, 1 ventral, 2 ventrolateral.Trichobothria: ta I, 25 clavate, 10 long and 10 shortfiliform; ta II, 23 clavate, 10 long and 20 short filiformin 2 rows for length; ta III, 22 clavate, 12 long and 13short filiform; ta IV, 22 clavate, 14 long and 20 shortfiliform and 15 clavate, 8 long and 6 short filiform onpalp. Clavate on I-IV in distal three-quarters in twobands; filiforms for length. Short epitrichobothrialfield on all legs as wide as clavates and uniform heightfor length.Coxae (Fig. 2F-G): Coxal bases dorsally easily seenfrom above. I longest, about 1.30 times longer thanII; IV clearly widest and basally with anterior cornerdistinct, edge curves dorsally, rounded at interface.I-IV ventrally covered with short golden brown hair atbase accompanied by long and short black and pallidhair, weak thorns present on prolateral faces of I-IIbut not as dense as in female and very much reducedon III, absent on IV, sparsely distributed in basal onehalf portion on coxae I, one fourth basal on coxae II,very few on proventral basal edge; above suture thickFigure 3. Neoheterophrictus crurofulvus sp. nov., male (WILD-09-ARA-472).A - Tibia to Palp, retrolateral view; B - Palp, Prolateral view; C - Palp, retroventral view; D - Palp, retrolateral view. Scale1.0mm for A-D.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–32543241

A new theraphosid genusblackish-brown long thick stiff setae along with brushof fine grey hair on I, reduced on II, only few setaeon III-IV. I-II slopping forward and III-IV backward.Retrolateral setation: I-III with median narrow lightbrush of pallid hair, IV glabrous.Leg pilosity: All legs not very hairy, III-IVrelatively more hairy than I-II. Femorae of all legsventrally have pallid brush like long hairs. All legscovered with mat of greenish-brown short hairs alongwith black bristles and pallid hairs. Number of longhairs extending well above base layer, I: fe p=d=r=10, v=50; pa, p=r=2, d=5, v=7; ti, p=5, d=15, r=7, v=20;mt, d=v=10, p=r=7; ta, d=6, p=3, r=3. II: fe d=12, p=4,r=10, v=30; pa, d=4, p=2, r=6, v=5; ti, d=12, p=r=6,v=20; mt, d=15, p=4, r=6, v=14; ta, d=10, p=4, r=2.III: fe, d=10, p=7, r=20, v=30; pa, d=r=4, p=v=2; ti,d=r=10, p=4, v=20; mt, d=12, p=4, v=10, r=7; ta, d=3,p=5, r=6. IV: fe, d=p=10, v=25, r=20; pa, d=6, p=r=5,v=4; ti, d=8, p=16, v=30, r=10; mt, d=30, p=20, v=25,r=50; ta, d=15, p=10, v=2, r=15.Scopulae: Entire on all tarsi, intermixed with hairand divided with hair on I-III and divided by setae onIV, division broader distally, dividing setae brown withpallid tips and hair pallid; ta I-III, only one setae (distalwith band of 3-4 setae), ta IV, divided with band of 4-5(distally 8-9) setae. Mt I, distal three-quarters; met II,distal half; mt III-IV, distal quarter, scanty. Metatarsiscopulae intermixed with long black hair and bristles.No scopula on proventral tibiae.Tarsal weakness: Not prominent.Claws: Paired claws on leg I-IV without dentitionand single bare claw on palp. Claw tufts well developedbut not obscuring claws.Abdomen pilosity (Image 2): Cuticle not exposeddorsally and ventrally; dorsally covered with a thickmat of brown hair, a fine layer of black, brown longand short hair, many pallid; ventrally and ventrolateraluniformly greenish-brown, thick mat of fine pallidhair, intermixed uniformly with long pallid hair.Spinnerets (Fig. 2H): Two pairs, digitiform,yellowish covered with brown hairs.Palp (Figs. 3A–D): Tarsi divided distally but notdeep. Bulb large and twisted on cymbium with longembolus. Embolus emerges from posterioventral areaof the tegulum, takes 180 0 bend and gradually taperstowards the tip, diverting away from the bulb.M. Siliwal et al.Variations in male paratypeTotal length: 18.79. Carapace: 8.73 long, 7.53wide. Ocular group: 0.65 long, 1.26 wide. MOQ:0.50 long, front width 0.68, back width 0.84. Labiumdamaged. Sternum: 3.98 long, 3.59 wide. Maxillae:2.97 long in front, 3.59 long in back, 1.99 wide;cuspules 155. Abdomen: 10.06 long, 6.36 wide. Legand palp morphometry in Table 2.Natural HistoryMales of the species were found in mixed forest andsemievergreen patch of forest under decaying logs orrocks with 60–70% of canopy cover, 30–80% groundcover (based on season) and 0–20% rock cover. Nomale was found in the burrow. Females were found inburrows constructed vertically on sloping ground (15–40 0 ), burrows were facing sloping direction and weremostly found around the base of large trees or decayinglogs. Burrows of female resembled those of Arctosaspp. (Lycosidae) with minimal silk (few strands) atthe entrance and inside the burrow. The first femalewas found wandering on a katchcha (unmetalled,country) road, near a fresh landslide by the roadsidebund because of the previous night’s rain. Probably,the burrow had been destroyed by the landslide and,when spotted, the female was in search of a new siteto construct her burrow. Searching for other femaleswas hampered by the lack of a thick layer of silk atthe burrow entrance (confused for a lycosid spiderburrow), which is characteristic of a theraphosidburrow. The burrows were 15–25 mm in diameter and0.15–0.25 m deep. In May 2010, one empty eggsacwas found in the burrow with the female; probably theeggsac was from the previous season. No eggsac wasfound in April–May. Mature males were observedfrom September to March.Neoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov.(Image 3–4, Figs. 4A–I, 5A–H, 6A–F, Table 3)urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:3742F690-386A-4C3E-BA7C-97378673A96DType specimensHolotype: Female, 19.iv.2010, mixed forest,Between Nagoda and Joida, Uttara Kannada, Karnataka,India (15.188028 0 N & 74.490056 0 E, 584m), coll. M.Siliwal, N. Gupta, S. Chauhan, WILD-10-ARA-1008.Allotype: Male, 24.i.2010, Kadra, Uttara Kannada,Karnataka, India (14.91897 0 N & 74.36071 0 E, 29m),3242Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.© Manju Siliwal© Manju SiliwalImage 3. Female of Neoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov.(Holotype, WILD-10-ARA-1008)coll. S. Behara, M. Siliwal, Neha Gupta, WILD-10-ARA-579.Paratype: 1 female, 26.ix.2009, data same asallotype, coll. M. Siliwal, S. Behera, WILD-09-ARA-418.DiagnosisFemales of N. sahyadri sp. nov. differ from otherspecies in spermathecae structure (Fig. 4I), tworeceptacles, each receptacle not very long and broad,constricted at apex, where 6–7 large contiguous lobespresent (in N. crurofulvus sp. nov., receptacles relativelylonger and gradually narrowing down towards apexand many, very small lobes); cephalothorax, chelicerae,legs and abdomen greenish-black in life (Image 3)(in N. crurofulvus sp. nov., legs, chelicerae, marginsof carapace and ventral and lateral sides of abdomencoffee brown, rest black in life); tarsi of same colouras legs, blackish-brown (in N. crurofulvus sp. nov.,legs uniformly coloured, coffee-brown).Male of N. sahyadri sp. nov. differs by thepresence of thick spine at base of primary tibial spuron retrolateral aspect (Fig. 6B); palp embolus gentlycurving retrolaterally towards tip; metatarsi and tarsiof all legs completely white (whereas in N. crurofulvussp. nov. distal two-thirds of metatarsi and completetarsi white), more brighter on anterior legs thanposterior legs (Image 4); spider lighter in colour thanmale of N. crurofulvus sp. nov.EtymologyThe species name is a noun in apposition forSahyadri, vernacular name for the Western Ghats.Image 4. Male of Neoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov.(Allotype, WILD-10-ARA-579)Description of female holotype (WILD-10-ARA-1008)Total length 22.78. Carapace 10.51 long, 7.91 wide,chelicerae 6.08 long. Abdomen 12.27 long, 6.80 wide.Spinnerets: PMS, 1.13 long, 0.29 wide, 0.46 apart;PLS, 1.45 basal, 1.08 middle, 1.10 apical, mid-width0.78, 0.71, 0.51 respectively, 3.63 total length.Colour in life (Image 3): Carapace, chelicerae, legsand abdomen greenish-black, reflects greyish shadein light. Periphery of carapace, legs and abdomencovered with pallid long hairs with black bristles withorange red tips.Carapace (Fig. 4A): Length to width ratio 1.30;reddish-brown; covered with strong mat of shortgreyish-brown hairs, more dense towards margins andconcentrated along striae radiating from fovea, longcurved light brown hairs with pallid tips at periphery.Bristles: 17 long on caput in anteromedially; 7 longand 14-16 short between anterior eyes; 9 long, 6 shortbetween PME; 9 long, 8 short on clypeus edge. Matof fine hair on anterior and posterior ocular area, finegrey hair between ALE-PLE. Fovea deep, slightlyprocurved. Two glabrous bands emerging fromanteriorlateral sides of carapace on either side of caputbroadens posteriorly and ends up before fovea. Caputnot much higher than cephalic and thoracic region.Eyes (Fig. 4B): Group occupies 0.30 of headwidth;ratio of group width to length 1.98. ALE clearlylarger than rest, PME clearly smaller than PLE. Eyediameter: ALE, 0.41; AME, 0.26; PLE, 0.23; PME,0.20. Distance between eyes: AME-AME, 0.13; PME-Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–32543243

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.Table 3. Neoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov., measurements of legs and palp of holotype (WILD–10–ARA–1008), paratype(WILD–10–ARA–579)Leg I Leg II Leg III Leg IV PalpHT PT HT PT HT PT HT PT HT PTFemur 6.56 9.1 5.31 8.27 5.22 7.38 6.75 10.49 4.92 5.40Patella 4.36 5.05 3.88 4.25 3.68 3.71 3.84 4.40 3.38 3.34Tibia 4.98 7.79 3.83 5.62 3.39 5.01 5.41 8.10 3.35 4.36Metatarsus 2.48 6.37 3.23 6.03 4.38 6.74 6.28 10.5 – –Tarsus 1.92 2.61 2.14 3.23 2.13 3.28 2.94 3.99 2.83 0.97Total 20.3 30.92 18.39 27.4 18.8 26.12 25.22 37.48 14.48 14.07MidwidthFemur 1.79 2.03 1.55 2.10 1.96 2.15 1.63 1.84 1.47 1.19Tibia 1.92 1.52 1.38 1.34 1.54 1.45 1.74 1.45 1.54 1.29Figure 4. Neoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov., female (WILD-10-ARA-1008).A - Carapace and abdomen dorsal view; B - Eye; C - Sternum, maxillae, labium, chelicerae; D - Chelicerae prolateral view; E- Maxillae, retrolateral view; F - Coxa I, prolateral view; G - Coxa I, retrolateral view; H - Spinnerets; I - Spermathecae. Scale1.0mm for B–I and scale 0.5mm for A.PLE, adjacent; AME-ALE, 0.02; PME-PME, 0.65.Ocular Quadrate, 0.74 long, 1.47 wide. MOQ: length,0.63; front width, 0.66; back width, 1.09. Clypeusnarrow.Maxillae (Fig. 4C,E): 3.11 long in front, 4.47 longin back, 2.22 wide. Posterior edge near heel concave,anterior lobe distinct, serrula absent, long bristlespresent; posterior ventral edge straight. Cuspules: ca.160 sparsely arranged in anterior corner in triangleregion. Prolateral face, scattered short and long hair3244Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genuspresent, few short stiff hair above maxillary suture,setae and bristles absent. Retrolateral face reddishorange,glabrous in centre with thin short (stiffblack bristles) spines on distal quarter, posterior andretroventral edge.Labium (Fig. 4C): 1.27 long, 1.49 wide; ca 24cuspules in band (in two groups) for one-fourth oflength anteriorly; cuspules similar in size to those onmaxillae. Basal groove shallow, distinct. Labiosternalgroove convex. One pair of large sigilla present inlabiosternal groove but not meeting in centre.Chelicerae (Fig. 4D): Intercheliceral spines absent.Chelicerae lyra absent. Prolateral, not smooth, bandwith ridges sparsely covered with hairs running oncurved chelicerae shape in just below dorso-prolateralface with 4-5 stiff bristles at base, a few scatteredsmall hairs present on prolateral face; retrolateralfaces glabrous, reddish-brown; 16 promarginal teeth ,28 basomesal teeth in 1-4 rows. Rastellum present, 21short thick curved spines in 1-2 rows present on dorsoprolateraledge of chelicerae.Sternum (Fig. 4C): 4.40 long, 4.08 wide. Almostround, high in centre, sloping gradually, coveredwith long and short black hair. Posterior angle shortand blunt and not separating coxae IV. Posterioredge clearly seen. A few scattered small pallid haircovering base of sternum like mat, but not dense. 1-2rows of long black bristles like hair present on marginsposteriorly. Pedicle pallid, not seen properly.Sigilla (Fig. 4C): three pairs, posterior sigilla,oval, 0.29 diameter, ca. 1.47 apart, 0.64 from margin;middle, oval, 0.18 diameter, 3.12 apart, 0.20 frommargin; anterior, very small, round, marginal.Legs: Formula 4132. All legs almost subequal inthickness, reddish-brown. Basifemoral thorns absenton all. Mat of short feathery hair (Image 3, resemblingscopulae hair) present on prolateral side of distal half ofcoxae, trochanter to patella of leg I and on retrolateralside of distal half of coxae, trochanter to tibia of palp(not as dense as on leg I); also narrow band of featherhair present on prolateral side of femorae of palp. MtIII-IV 2.06 to 2.14 times longer than ta.Spines: I: mt, v=1. II: ti, v=2; mt, v=4. III: pa,p=1, ti, p=1, r=1, v=4; mt, p=r=2, v=6. IV: ti, p=r=2,v=4; mt, p=r=2, v=6. Palp: ti: p=1. Spines on distalmetatarsi: I, 1 ventral; II, 1ventral, 2 ventrolateral; III-IV, 1ventral, 2 ventrolateral.Trichobothria: Tarsi: I, 28 clavate, 11 long andM. Siliwal et al.8 short filiform; II, 29 clavate, 10 long and 7 shortfiliform; III, 29 clavate, 8 long and 6 short filiform;IV, 24 clavate, 11 long and 6 short filiform; palp, 27clavate, 6 long and 4 short filiform. Clavate on I-IVin distal three-quarters in two rows; filiforms only inbasal three-quarters. Short epitrichobothrial hair fieldon tarsi as wide as clavates and uniform height forlength but not very dense as seen in theraphosids.Coxae (Figs. 4F-G): Coxal bases dorsally easilyseen from above. I longest, about 1.33 times length ofII; IV clearly widest, edge curves dorsally, rounded atinterface. Coxae ventrally with short and long blackhair, weak thorns present on prolateral faces of I-IIand very much reduced on III-IV, sparsely distributedin basal one half portion on coxae I, one fourth basalon coxae II, very few on proventral basal edge; abovesuture thick blackish-brown long thick stiff setaealong with brush of fine grey hair on leg I-II, on III-IVreduced to a few setae. I-IV ventrally covered with amat of small grey hairs at base of coxae, intermixedwith long and short black and pallid hair, all coxasloping forward. Retrolateral setation: I-III withmedian narrow light thin brush of pallid hair in centre,IV glabrous.Leg pilosity: Posterior legs more hairy than anteriorlegs. Femorae of all legs ventrally have pallid brushlike long hair but not very dense. All legs coveredwith a mat of greyish-brown short hair. A number oflong hairs extending well above base layer, I: fe, p=10,d=15, v=50; pa, d=8, p=2, v=10, r=12; ti, d=12, p=15,v=14, r=13; mt, d=6, p=15, v=8, r=12; ta, d=p=5, r=4.II: fe, d=15, p=5, v=25, r=15; pa, d=r=4, p=2, v=7; ti,d=12, p=10, v=21, r=7; mt, d=10, p=12, v=16, r=6; ta,d=6, p=18, r=12. III: fe, d=20, p=14, v=40, r=12; pa,d=8, p=5, v=4, r=3; ti, d=10, p=15, v=25, r=15; mt,d=p=20, v=30, r=20; ta, d=7, p=9, r=7. IV: fe, d=p=20,v=35; pa, d=18, p=10, v=15, r=25; ti, d=p=20, v=15,r=25; mt, d=p=25, v=20, r=30; ta, d=6, p=25, r=20.Palp: fe, d=, v=25; pa, d=, v=4; ti, d=, p=4, v=14, r=5;ta, d=, p= r=8.Scopulae: Entire on all tarsi, divided with setae,division broader distally; ta I, divided centrally withband of 3-4 setae (distally 5-6 setae), ta II, dividedwith band of 5-6 setae (distally 8-9 setae), ta III,divided with band of 5-6 setae (distally 8-10 setae), taIV, divided with band of 5-6 setae (distally 9-10 setae);palp ta divided with band of 4-5 setae (distally 6-8setae). Metatarsi scopulae undivided and intermixedJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–32543245

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.Figure 5. Neoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov., male (WILD-10-ARA-579).A - Carapace and abdomen dorsal view; B - Eye; C - Sternum, maxillae, labium, chelicerae; D - Chelicerae prolateral view;E - Maxillae, retrolateral view; F - Coxa I, prolateral view; G - Coxa I, retrolateral view; H - Spinnerets. Scale 1.0mm for B,D–H and scale 0.5mm for A, C.with long black hair and bristles. No scopula onproventral tibiae.Tarsal weakness: Not prominent.Claws: Paired claws on leg I-IV without dentitionand single bare claw on palp. Claw tufts well developedbut not obscuring claws.Abdomen pilosity (Image 3): Oval; cuticle notexposed dorsally and ventrally, covered with a thickmat of black-brown hair intermixed with long andshort black hair, many pallid hairs.Spinnerets (Fig. 4H): Two pairs, digitiform,yellowish with brown hairs.Spermathecae (Fig. 4I): Two receptacles withmultiple large lobes at apex. Each receptacle stout,broader (almost as wide as width of the cluster of lobesat apex) with constriction at apex, where a cluster of6–7 large contiguous lobes (of different size) present;spermatheca appears like a tree with a stout trunk.Description of allotype male (WILD-10-ARA-579)Total length 19.27. Carapace 10.04 long, 8.78 wide,chelicerae 5.36 long. Abdomen 9.23 long, 4.51 wide.Spinnerets: PMS, 0.54 long, 0.33 wide, 0.21 apart;PLS, 1.05 basal, 1.37 middle, 1.30 apical, mid-width0.35, 0.49, 0.35 respectively, 3.72 total length.Colour in life (Image 4): Carapace, greenish-brownwith lighter margins. Legs and palp greenish-brownexcept for metatarsi of legs and tarsi of legs and palpwhite (brighter on anterior legs than posterior legs andpalp); margins of carapace lighter. Chelicerae anddorsal side of coxae and trochanter creamish/pallid.Abdomen dorsal and ventral light brown.Carapace (Fig. 5A): Length to width ratio 1.14;reddish-brown, lighter towards periphery; coveredwith a strong mat of short golden/pallid hairs, moredense towards margins and concentrated along striaeradiating from fovea, long, curved brown with pallidtips hairs at periphery. Bristles: 6 long, many shortanteromedially; 8 long, many short like brush of pallid3246Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.Figure 6. Neoheterophrictus sahyadri sp. nov., male (WILD-10-ARA-579).A - Tibial spur, prolateral view; B - Tibial spur, retrolateral view; C - Tibia to Palp, retrolateral view; D - Palp, Prolateral view;E - Palp, ventral view; F - Palp, retrolateral view. Scale 1.0mm for A–F.hairs between PME; 12 long, 11 short on clypeus edge.A mat of fine hair on anterior and posterior ocular area,fine golden hair between PLE-ALE, PME-PME, ALE-ALE. Fovea deep, slightly procurved. Two glabrousbands emerging from anteriorlateral sides of carapace,on either side of caput, broadens posteriorly and endsbefore fovea. Caput is not higher than cephalic andthoracic region.Eyes (Fig. 5B): Group occupies 0.47 of headwidth;ratio of group width to length 2.09. ALEclearly larger than rest, PME smaller than rest. Eyeson ocular tubercle. Eye diameter: ALE, 0.31; AME,0.29; PLE, 0.27; PME, 0.26. Distance between eyes:AME-AME, 0.06; PME-PLE, adjacent; AME-ALE,0.04; PME-PME, 0.47. Ocular Quadrate, 0.65 long,1.36 wide. MOQ: length, 0.54; front width, 0.59; backwidth, 0.98; difference between back and front width,0.39. Clypeus very narrow.Maxillae (Fig. 5C,E): 2.67 long in front, 3.59 longin back, 1.73 wide. Posterior edge near heel concave,anterior lobe distinct, serrula absent, long bristlespresent; posterior ventral edge straight. Cuspules:ca.140 in anterior corner in triangle region. Prolateralface, scattered short and long hair present, a few shortstiff hair above maxillary suture with setae and bristlesabsent. Retrolateral face reddish-orange, glabrous incentre with thin short (stiff black bristles) spines ondistal quarter, posterior and retroventral edge.Labium (Fig. 5C): 1.19 long, 1.51 wide; ca. 70cuspules in band for quarter of length anteriorly;cuspules similar in size to those on maxillae. Basalgroove shallow, distinct. Labiosternal groove convex.One pair of large sigilla present in labiosternal groove,not touching at the centre.Chelicerae (Fig. 5D): 5.53 long, intercheliceralspines absent. Chelicerae lyra absent. Prolateral, notsmooth, band with strong ridges (more prominent onmid band), sparsely covered with hairs running incurved chelicerae shape just below dorso-prolateralface with 3–4 stiff bristles at base, and a few scatteredsmall hairs present on prolateral face; retrolateralfaces glabrous, reddish-brown; 17 promarginal, 41basomesal teeth in 1–4 rows. Rastellum not veryprominent, covered with 17 stiff bristle-like spinesin 2–3 rows on anterior dorsoprolateral edge ofchelicerae.Sternum (Fig. 5C): 4.63 long, 3.80 wide. Oval,high in centre, sloping gradually, covered with longJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–32543247

A new theraphosid genusand short brown hair. Posterior angle short and bluntand not separating coxae IV. Posterior edge clearlyseen. A few small pallid hair covering base of sternumlike a mat but not dense. A single row of long brownbristle-like hair present on margins in posterior half.Pedicle pallid, not seen properly.Sigilla (Fig. 5C): three pairs, posterior sigilla,oval, 0.39 diameter, ca. 1.92 apart, 0.42 distance frommargin; median sigilla, oval, 0.23 diameter, 2.40apart, 0.13 from margin; anterior, very small, round,marginal.Legs (Figs. 6A-B): Formula 4123. Reddish-brown,covered with a mat of grey hair intermixed with hairsand bristles. All legs almost subequal in thickness.Basifemoral thorns absent on all. A mat of short featherhair (Image 4, resembling scopulae hair) present onprolateral side of distal half of coxae, trochanter tobasal half of patella of leg I and on retrolateral sideof distal half of coxae, trochanter to tibia of palp (notas dense as on leg I). Mt IV 2.60 times longer thanta IV, rest 1.90 to 2.40 times longer than ta. Tibialapophysis consists of two spurs ventrally, primary spuron ventro-retrolateral, long, slightly swollen at apexwith prominent spine at tip, at base of primary spur onretrolateral face long thick straight spine; secondaryspur on ventro-prolateral aspect of primary spur,rounded at apex with numerous bristles, hairs and afew tubercles on the inner side of it, long curved spineemerge at base of secondary spur, covering spur onits retrolateral aspect. No granules or spines presentbetween two spurs.Spines: I: ti, v=2 spurs, each with pointed spine,r=1; mt, v=1. II: ti, v=3, r=1; mt, p=1, v=2. III: ti, p=1,r=2, v=4; mt, p=r=2, v=7. IV: ti, p=1, r=2, v=4; mt,p=3, r=2, v=9. Spines on distal metatarsi: I, 1 ventral;II, 2 ventrolateral; III, 1 ventral, 2 ventrolateral, IV, 1ventral, 2 ventrolateral.Trichobothria: ta I, 34 clavate, 10 long and 6 shortfiliform; ta II, 30+broken clavate, 12 long and 8 shortfiliform in 2 rows for length; ta III, 22+broken clavate,8 long and 6 short filiform; ta IV, 18+broken clavate,10 long and 7 short filiform; palp, 26 clavate, 5 longand 4 short filiform. Clavate on I-IV in distal threequartersin two bands; filiforms for length. Shortepitrichobothrial hair field on all legs as wide asclavates and uniform height for length.Coxae (Fig. 5F-G): Coxal bases dorsally easily seenfrom above. I longest, about 1.30 times longer thanM. Siliwal et al.II; IV clearly widest and basally with anterior cornerdistinct, edge curves dorsally, rounded at interface.I-IV ventrally covered with a mat of small pallid hairsintermixed with long and short black and pallid hair.Weak thorns present on prolateral faces of I-II but notas dense as in female and very much reduced on III,absent on IV, sparsely distributed in basal half of coxaeI, basal quarter of coxae II, very few on proventralbasal edge; above suture thick blackish-brown longthick stiff setae along with brush of fine grey hair on I,reduced on II, only a few setae on III-IV. I-III slopingforward and IV backward. Retrolateral setation: I-IIIwith median narrow light brush of pallid hair, IVglabrous.Leg pilosity: All legs not very hairy, III-IVrelatively more hairy than I-II. All legs covered witha thick mat of pallid short hairs. Number of long hairsextending well above base layer, I: fe d=10 , v=30; pa,p=2, d=6; ti, p=7, d=15, r=10, v=12; mt, p=2+broken,d=15, v=12, r=4+broken; ta, d=10, p=8, r=10, v=4. II:fe d=10, r=5, v=50; pa, d=r=8, p=3, v=5; ti, d=15, p=5,r=12, v=25; mt, d=20, p=9, r=12, v=16; ta, d=12, p=9,r=12, v=4. III: fe, d=8, p=10, r=25, v=30; pa, d=r=4,p=7, v=10; ti, d=9, r=6, p=8, v=20; mt, d=35, p=17,v=25, r=15; ta, d=10, p=12, r=15. IV: fe, d=8, p=10,v=30, r=5; pa, p=8, r=4, v=5; ti, d=12, p=15, v=25,r=20; mt, d=45, p=25, r=v=35; ta, d=7, p=16, r=20.Scopulae: Entire on all tarsi, intermixed with hairand divided with hair on tarsi I-III and tarsi IV dividedwith brown pale-tipped setae, division broader distally;ta I-II, divided with single row of hairs (distal bunch ofsetae like hairs at base of claw tufts; III, divided with aband of 3-4 setae (distal with a bunch of setae), ta IV,divided with band of 4-5 setae (distally 10-12 setae).Mt I, distal three-quarters; met II, distal half; mt III-IV,distal quarter, scanty. Metatarsi scopulae intermixedwith long black hair, bristles and spines. No scopulaon proventral tibiae.Tarsal weakness: not prominent.Claws: Paired claws on leg I-IV without dentitionand single bare claw on palp. Claw tufts well developedbut not obscuring claws.Abdomen pilosity (Image 4): Dorsally, coffeebrownwith greyish shade posteriorly, ventrally,greenish-brown. Cuticle not exposed dorsally andventrally; dorsally covered with a thick mat of pallidhair intermixed with brown pale-tipped bristles;ventrally and ventrolateral uniformly greenish-brown,3248Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.a thick mat of fine pallid hair, intermixed uniformlywith long pallid hair.Spinnerets (Fig. 5H): Two pairs, digitiform,yellowish covered with pallid hairs.Palp (Figs. 6C–F): Tarsi divided distally but notdeep. Bulb large and twisted on cymbium with longembolus. Embolus emerges from posterioventral areaof the tegulum, takes a 180 0 bend and gradually taperstowards tip, diverting the retrolateral side of the bulb.Natural HistoryMale and females of the species were found inmixed forest and semievergreen patches or moistareas of forest under decaying log or rocks with 60–70 % of canopy cover, 30–80 % ground cover (basedon season) and 0–20 % rock cover. No male wasfound in the burrow. Females were found in shallowholes/burrows (maximum 30cm deep) below rock ordecaying log. Females were found using burrowsfor hiding when log or rock was disturbed, otherwisefound resting below the substrate. In the resting placethey had prepared a small border with mud. Habitatinformation is similar to N. crurofulvus sp. nov.Neoheterophrictus uttarakannada sp. nov.(Image 5, Figs. 7A–H, Table 4)urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:745FA172-9CDB-4873-895C-30F20E1EFF4DType specimensHolotype: Female, 14.iv.2010, Anshi NationalPark, Uttara Kannada, Karnataka, India (15.008 0 N &74.384472 0 E, 538m), coll. M. Siliwal, N. Gupta and S.Chauhan, WILD-10-ARA-923.Paratype: 1 female, 13.iii.2010, mixed forest,between Nagoda and Joida, behind agriculture fields,Uttara Kannada, Karnataka, India (15.191972 0 N &74.488611 0 E, 581m), coll. M. Siliwal, N. Gupta, S.Behera, K. Ramesh, WILD-10-ARA-672.DiagnosisFemale of the new species differs from other speciesin spermathecae structure (Fig. 7H), two receptacles,each receptacle relatively short and broader at base,gradually narrows towards apex, where 6–7 largecontiguous lobes (of varying size) present (in N.crurofulvus sp. nov., receptacles relatively longer andgradually narrowing down towards apex with manyvery small lobes at apex; in N. sahyadri sp. nov.,© Manju SiliwalImage 5. Female of Neoheterophrictus uttarakannada sp.nov. (Holotype, WILD-10-ARA-923)receptacles relatively short, broad, uniform widthwith constriction at apex, where 6–7 large contiguouslobes present); mt and ta I-II paler colour (yellowishorange)and less hair than rest of the legs parts (in N.crurofulvus sp. nov. and N. sahyadri sp. nov. all legs ofuniform colour). Male unknown.EtymologyThe species name is noun in apposition for thedistrict name Uttara Kannada (North Canara District),from where the type specimens were collected.Description of holotype female (WILD-10-ARA-923)Total length 18.30. Carapace 8.56 long, 6.72wide, chelicerae 5.20 long. Abdomen 9.74 long, 5.40wide. Spinnerets: PMS, 0.83 long, 0.24 wide, 0.32apart; PLS, 1.52 basal, 1.08 middle, 1.27 apical, midwidth0.67, 0.65, 0.52 respectively, 3.87 total length.Morphometry of legs and palp in Table 4.Colour in life (Image 5): Carapace, chelicerae, legsand abdomen greenish-brown, reflects brownish shadein light. The periphery of carapace, legs and abdomencovered with pallid long hairs and black bristles withorange red tips.Carapace (Fig. 7A): Length to width ratio1.30; reddish-brown; covered with a strong mat ofshort black hairs, more dense towards margins andconcentrated along striae radiating from fovea, withlong curved light brown hairs at periphery. Bristles:14 long on caput in mid-dorsal line; 7 long and 14–16short anteromedially; 9 long, 5 short between PME;Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–32543249

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.Figure 7. Neoheterophrictus uttarakannada sp. nov., female (WILD-10-ARA-923).A - Carapace and abdomen dorsal view; B - Eye; C - Sternum, maxillae, labium, chelicerae; D - Chelicerae prolateral view;E - Maxillae, retrolateral view; F - Coxa I, prolateral view; G - Spinnerets; H - Spermathecae. Scale 1.0mm for B–H and scale0.5mm for A.1 long, 7 short on clypeus edge. A mat of fine hair onanterior and posterior ocular area, fine golden hair atbase of PLE. Fovea deep, slightly procurved. Twoglabrous bands emerging from anteriorlateral sides ofcarapace, on either side of caput, broadens posteriorlyand ends up much before fovea. Caput is not muchhigher than cephalic and thoracic region.Eyes (Fig. 7B): Group occupies 0.29 of head-width;ratio of group width to length 1.79. ALE clearly largerthan rest, PME clearly slightly smaller than PLE. Eyediameter: ALE, 0.36; AME, 0.26; PLE, 0.25; PME,0.23. Distance between eyes: AME-AME, 0.14;PME-PLE, adjacent; AME-ALE, 0.03; PME-PME,0.44. Ocular Quadrate, 0.69 long, 1.24 wide. MOQ:length, 0.57; front width, 0.58; back width, 0.76.Clypeus narrow.Maxillae (Fig. 7C,E): 2.48 long in front, 3.36 longin back, 1.75 wide. Posterior edge near heel concave,anterior lobe distinct, serrula absent, long bristlespresent; posterior ventral edge straight. Cuspules:ca. 200 arranged in anterior corner in triangle region.Prolateral face, scattered short and long hairs present,a few short stiff hairs above maxillary suture, setaeand bristles absent. Retrolateral face reddish-orange,glabrous in centre with thin short (stiff black bristles)spines on distal quarter, posterior and retroventraledge.Labium (Fig. 7C): 0.94 long, 1.14 wide; ca 37 +broken cuspules in band for quarter of length anteriorly;cuspules similar in size to those on maxillae. Basalgroove shallow, distinct. Labiosternal groove convex.One pair of large sternal sigilla present in labiosternalgroove but not meeting in centre.Chelicerae (Fig. 7D): Intercheliceral spines absent.Chelicerae lyra absent. Prolateral surface, not smooth,band with ridges sparsely covered with hairs runningon curved chelicerae shape just below dorso-prolateralface with 3-4 stiff bristles at base, a few scatteredsmall hairs present on prolateral face; retrolateralfaces glabrous, reddish-brown; 15 promarginal teeth,38 basomesal teeth in 1-4 rows. Rastellum present,22 short thick curved spines in 2 rows present on3250Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.Table 4. Neoheterophrictus uttarakannada sp. nov., measurements of legs and palp of holotype (WILD–10–ARA–923),paratype (WILD–10–ARA–672)Leg I Leg II Leg III Leg IV PalpHT PT HT PT HT PT HT PT HT PTFemur 5.74 5.66 4.73 4.47 4.45 4.36 6.4 5.64 4.34 3.83Patella 3.84 3.62 3.11 2.78 2.82 2.89 3.43 3.34 2.86 2.53Tibia 4.42 4.09 2.53 3.27 2.38 3.37 4.44 4.95 2.70 2.58Metatarsus 2.82 2.31 2.70 2.62 3.85 3.28 5.59 5.22 – –Tarsus 1.83 2.09 1.87 2.19 2.19 2.43 2.51 3.22 2.23 2.51Total 18.65 17.77 14.94 15.33 15.69 16.33 22.37 22.37 12.13 11.45MidwidthFemur 1.79 1.38 1.58 1.11 1.75 1.33 1.46 1.22 1.15 0.84Tibia 1.43 1.29 1.30 1.06 1.35 1.19 1.38 1.30 1.25 0.99dorsoprolateral edge of chelicerae.Sternum (Fig. 7C): 3.81 long, 3.28 wide. Almostround, high in centre, sloping gradually, covered withlong and short black hair. Posterior angle short and bluntand not separating coxae IV. Posterior edge clearlyseen. A few scattered small pallid hairs covering baseof sternum like a mat but not dense and not coveringsternum. A single row of long black bristle-like hairspresent on margins posteriorly. Pedicle pallid, notseen properly.Sigilla (Fig. 7A): three pairs, posterior sigilla,oval, 0.33 diameter, ca. 1.39 apart, 0.42 from margin;middle, oval, 0.11 diameter, 2.95 apart, 0.06 frommargin; anterior, very small, round, marginal.Legs: Formula 4132. All legs almost subequalin thickness, reddish-brown. Basifemoral thornsabsent on all. A mat of short feather hair (Image 5,resembling scopulae hair) present on prolateral side ofdistal half of coxae, trochanter to patella of leg I andon retrolateral side of distal half of coxae, trochanterto tibia of palp (not as dense as on leg I). Mt IV 2.23times longer than ta IV; mt III 1.75 times longer thanta III; rest 1.40-1.50 times longer than ta.Spines: I: ti, p=1; mt, v=1. II: ti, p=2, r=1; mt, p=1,r=1, v=2. III: pa, p=1, ti, p=r=2, v=1; mt, p=4, r=3,v=2. IV: ti, p=3, r=4, v=1; mt, p=5, r=3, v=2. Palp:ti: p=1, r=1. Spines on distal metatarsi: I, 1 ventral, 1ventrolateral; II, 1ventral, 2ventrolateral; III, 1ventral,2ventrolateral; IV, 1ventral, 2ventrolateral.Trichobothria: Tarsi: I, 26 clavate, 10 long and8 short filiform; II, 24 clavate, 10 long and 6 shortfiliform; III, 23 clavate, 10 long and 6 short filiform;IV, 22-26 clavate, 10 long and 6 short filiform; palp,26 clavate, 6 long and 4 short filiform. Clavate on I-IVin distal three-quarters in two rows; filiforms only inbasal three-quarters. Short epitrichobothrial hair fieldon tarsi as wide as clavates and uniform height forlength but not very dense.Coxae (Fig. 7F): Coxal bases dorsally easily seenfrom above. I longest, about 1.33 times length of II;IV clearly widest and basally with anterior cornerindistinct, edge curves dorsally, rounded at interface.Coxae ventrally with short and long black hair, weakthorns present on prolateral faces of I-II and very muchreduced on III, absent on IV, sparsely distributed inbasal half of coxae I, basal quarter on coxae II, very fewon proventral basal edge; above suture thick blackishbrownlong thick stiff setae along with a brush of finegrey hair on I, reduced on II, only few setae on III-IV.I-IV ventrally covered with golden brown mat of smallhairs at base of coxae, long and short black and pallidhair, all coxa sloping forward. Retrolateral setation:I-III with median narrow light thin brush of pallid hairin centre, IV glabrous.Leg pilosity (Image 5): Leg III-IV, tibia to tarsicovered with long hairs. Femorae of all legs ventrallyhave pallid brush like long hair. All legs covered witha mat of greenish-brown short hairs. A number of longhairs extending well above base layer, I: fe, d=7, v=24;pa, d=10, p=2, v=10, r=8; ti, d=14, p=r=6 v=20; mt,d=12, p=4, v=7, r=2; ta, d=10, p=5, r=5. II: fe, d=8,p=2, v=16, r=18; pa, d=9, p=4, v=8, r=7; ti, d=15, p=7,v=15, r=7; mt, d=10, p=7, v=14, r=6; ta, d=12, p=r=6.III: fe, d=17, p=7, v=24, r=5; pa, d=p=5, v=4, r=9; ti,d=6, p=8, v=12, r=13; mt, d=13, p=20, v=10, r=13; ta,d=8, p=9, r=12. IV: fe, d=8, p=4, v=30, r=2; pa, d=7,Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–32543251

A new theraphosid genusp=v=6, r=10; ti, d=10, p=r=v=12; mt, d=13, p=v=20,r=25; ta, d=7, p=10, r=14. Palp: fe, d=7, v=14; pa,d=10, v=4; ti, d=10, p=5, v=10, r=2; ta, d=12, p=4,r=2.Scopulae: Entire on all tarsi, intermixed with hairand divided with setae, division broader distally; ta I,divided centrally with band of 4-5 setae (distally 8-9setae), ta II, divided with band of 4-5 setae (distally12-14 setae), ta III, divided with band of 4-5 setae(distally 14-16 setae), ta IV, divided with band of 4-5setae (distally 16-18 setae); palp ta divided with bandof 4-5 setae (distally 6-8 setae). Metatarsi scopulaeundivided, intermixed with long black hair and bristles.No scopula on proventral tibiae.Tarsal weakness: Not prominent.Claws: Paired claws on leg I-IV without dentitionand single bare claw on palp. Claw tufts well developedbut not obscuring claws.Abdomen pilosity (Image 5): Oval; cuticle notexposed dorsally and ventrally; dorsally covered witha thick mat of greyish-black hair intermixed with longand short black hairs, many pallid hairs; ventrally andventrolateral a uniformly greyish-brown, thick mat offine greyish-brown hair, intermixed uniformly withlong pallid hairs.Spinnerets (Fig. 7G): Two pairs, digitiform,yellowish with brown hairs.Spermathecae (Fig. 7H): Two receptacles withmultiple large lobes at apex, appears like sketch oftree. Each receptacle relatively short and broader atbase, gradually narrows towards apex (like tree trunk),where 6–7 large contiguous lobes (of varying sizes)present.Variations in paratypeTotal length: 18.79. Carapace: 7.28 long, 5.96wide. Ocular group: 0.52 long, 1.09 wide. MOQ: 0.47long, front width 0.60, back width 0.77. Labium 1.24long, 1.48 wide, 27 cuspules. Sternum: 3.97 long,3.07 wide. Maxillae: 2.68 long in front, 3.34 longin back, 1.95 wide; cuspules ca.200. Abdomen: 8.37long, 4.35 wide.Natural HistoryIt is similar to N. sahyadri sp. nov., females werefound below small rocks and had shallow burrows fortemporary hideouts.DISCUSSIONM. Siliwal et al.Guadanucci (2011) transferred Heterophrictus tothe subfamily Eumenophorinae based on presenceof plumose stridulatory setae above suture of coxaeI. However, it is not stated whether this character ispresent only on coxae I or coxae I and II or all coxae.As per characters of Eumenophorinae, paddle andspike setae or just spike setae are present on coxaeI-II (Smith 1990). Moreover, none of the membersof the Eumenophorinae have been reported to have arastellum on the chelicerae. Rastellum is only reportedin Euphrictus Hirst, 1908 (Selenogyrinae). It is verylikely that a rastellum is present in many describedtheraphosid genera and which would have been missedout by pioneer arachnologists. A complete revisionfor theraphosid genera is urgently needed. As the newgenus is phylogenetically related to Heterophrictus,we also place Neoheterophrictus gen. nov. in thesubfamily Eumernophorinae.An interesting character observed in all thespecimens (both sexes) of Neoheterophrictus gen. nov.is the presence of large feathery hair (appearing likescopulae from lateral view) on prolateral of distal halfof coxae, trochanter to patella of leg I and on retrolateralof distal half of coxae, trochanter to tibia and a bandon prolateral femorae of palp. It is very prominentfrom the dorsal view in preserved and spider in life.This character has been previously reported in theAustralian genus Xamiatus Raven, 1981 of the familyNemesiidae; African theraphosid genera EncyocratellaStrand, 1907 (Stromatopelminae) and PelinobiusKarsch, 1885 (Eumenophorinae) (Raven 1981; Gallon2003, 2005, 2010). According to Gallon (2003), thesehairs are used with a stridulatory function.With the additional information on Plesiophrictusand Heterophrictus by Guadanucci (2011), thephotographs of type specimens of Plesiophrictusdeposited at Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata werere-examined and comments on a few Plesiophrictussp. are provided here. However, the validation forall Indian Plesiophrictus is not provided here due tolack of information on important generic charactersand it will be done after re-examination of the typespecimens in different museums.The type specimen of Plesiophrictus bhori Gravely,1915 (Type, ZSIK 2218/17) from Parambikulam,Cochin State (now Kerala) and P. mahabaleshwari3252Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.© Manju SiliwalImage 6. Plesiophrictus bhori, chelicerae, prolateral view© Manju SiliwalImage 7. Plesiophrictus mahabaleshwari, chelicerae,prolateral view© Manju SiliwalImage 8. Plesiophrictus mahabaleshwari, maxillae, ventralviewTikader, 1977 (ZSIK, Type, number not designated)from Mahabaleshwar, Maharashtra. These spiderspecimens possess rastellum (Images 6–7), serrulaabsent (Image 8) and procurved fovea. Based on thesecharacters, we transfer P. bhori and P. mahabaleshwarito the genus Heterophrictus. Further, the spermathecaeof P. mahabaleshwari (Image 9) resemble that ofHeterophrictus milleti Pocock, 1900 and based on it, wesynonymise H. mahabaleshwari with Heterophrictusmilleti.The type specimen of Plesiophrictus nilagiriensisSiliwal et al., 2007 was also re-examined and wasfound that the species has transverse fovea, serrulapresent and absence of rastellum on maxillae. Thesecharacters validate the placement of P. nilagiriensis inthe genus Plesiophrictus.Image 9. Plesiophrictus mahabaleshwari, spermathecae,dorsal viewREFERENCES© Manju SiliwalGallon, R.C. (2003). A new African arboreal genus andspecies of theraphosid spider (Araneae, Theraphosidae,Stromatopelminae) which lacks spermathecae. Bulletin ofthe British Arachnological Society 12(9): 405–411.Gallon, R.C. (2005). Encyocratella olivacea Strand, 1907,a senior synonym of Xenodendrophila gabrieli Gallon,2003 (Araneae: Theraphosidae: Stromatopelminae) with adescription of the male. Zootaxa 1003: 45–56.Gallon, R.C. (2010). On some Southern African Harpactirinae,with notes on the eumenophorines Pelinobius muticusKarsch, 1885 and Monocentropella Strand, 1907 (Araneae,Theraphosidae). Bulletin of the British ArachnologicalSociety 15(2): 29–48.Guadanucci, J.P.L. (2011). The genus Plesiophrictus PocockJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–32543253

A new theraphosid genusM. Siliwal et al.and revalidation of Heterophrictus Pocock (Araneae:Theraphosidae). The Journal of Arachnology 39(3): 523–527.Raven, R. (1981). A Review of the Australian Genra of theMygalomorph Spider Subfamily Diplurinae (Dipluridae:Chelicerata). Australian Journal of Zoology 29(3): 321–363.Raven, R.J. (1985). The spider infraorder Mygalomorphae(Araneae): cladistics and systematics. Bulletin of theAmerican Museum of Natural History (USA): 1–180.Siliwal, M. & S. Molur (2009). Redescription, distribution andstatus of the Karwar Large Burrowing Spider Thrigmopoeustruculentus Pocock, 1899 (Araneae: Theraphosidae), aWestern Ghats endemic ground mygalomorph. Journal ofThreatened Taxa 1(6): 331–339.Smith, A. M., Ed. (1990). Baboon Spiders - The Theraphosidaeof Africa and the Middle East. London, FitzgeraldPublishing, 141pp.Acknowledgment: Authors (MS and NG) are grateful to the followingpersonnel and institutions: PCCF, Karnataka Forest Department for givingpermission and logistic help during the surveys; Mr. Sunil Kumar, DeputyConservator of Forest, Dandeli WLS, and Mr. R. Gokul, Conservator ofForests, Karwar Division for the logistic support and help during the surveys;Mr. Ramesh and Mr. Suraj Chauhan for assisting in field during the surveys;CEPF (Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund)-ATREE (Ashoka Trust ForResearch In Ecology And The Environment) Western Ghats Small GrantsProgram for funding the tarantula project during which the new genus wasfound; Dr. Peter Jäger, Senckenberg Museum, Frankfurt, for providingvaluable old reprints on this group of spiders; Dr. Sanjay Molur and Ms.Sally Walker, Zoo Outreach Organization, for initiating, and their supportand encouragement of the Indian tarantula project; Dr. Bhaskar Acharya,ATREE and Dr. Jack Tordoff, CEPF for their interest and encouragementto the Western Ghats tarantula project; Dr. Bilal Habib, Wildlife Instituteof India for helping in scanning drawings. RR and MS wish to thank theAustralian Biological Resources Study grant research funds for partiallyfunding a trip to Australia for MS and so, some of the information used inthis paper was obtained by MS during her visit to Queensland Museum,Brisbane. NG wishes to deeply thank Dr. Sanjay Keshari Das, AssistantProfessor, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi for all theencouragement and support he provided as a supervisor for the Mastersdissertation during which this spider was found.Author Details and Author Contribution:Ma n j u Siliwal has been working on spiders since 1997. She has specializedon taxonomy of primitive spiders (mygalomorphs including tarantulas) andhas described many new species from India. Her main interest lies intaxonomy, ecology and conservation of Indian spiders. Her contribution tothis paper is in collecting specimens, identifying the species and preparingthe manuscript including taxonomy.Ne h a Gu p t a is MSc in biodiversity and conser vation and is very muchinterested in ecology and conservation of Indian spiders. For her M.Sc.dissertation, she worked on the ecology of trapdoor spiders of the familyIdiopidae in Ut tara Kannada, Karnataka. She was involved in the spidersurveys when some of the new species listed in this paper were collected.She also assisted in taking morphometry information for most of thespecimens and finalizing illustrations.Ro b e r t Ra v e n is world renowned expert on primitive spiders(mygalomorphs) and has ex perience of about 40 years in spider taxonomy.He has described 42 genera and 351 species till date from different partsof the world, pre dominantly from Australia. His contribution to this paperwas in finalizing the text, working on language of the paper, reviewing thetaxonomy of the species and providing critical inputs on various genera ofTheraphosidae.Appendix 1. Neoheterophrictus crurofulvus sp. nov., measurements of legs and palp of female Paratypes (WILD–10–ARA–1061, WILD–10–ARA–1066, WILD–10–ARA–1065,WILD–10–ARA–1088).Leg I Leg II Leg III Leg IV PalpWILD-1088WILD-1065WILD-1066WILD-1061WILD-1088WILD-1065WILD-1066WILD-1061WILD-1088WILD-1065WILD-1066WILD-1061WILD-1088WILD-1065WILD-1066WILD-1061WILD-1088WILD-1065WILD-1066WILD-1061Kulgi Kulgi Kulgi Kulgi8.59 7.51 6.38 8.21 7.36 6.57 5.39 7.36 6.84 6.18 5.82 6.92 10.00 8.46 8.37 9.46 6.10 5.47 5.66 5.685.67 4.85 4.95 5.93 4.71 4.44 3.98 4.62 4.32 4.21 3.37 4.24 5.32 5.12 3.67 4.80 4.18 3.53 3.54 3.926.48 5.81 6.06 6.33 4.67 4.34 4.28 4.40 2.69 3.52 4.48 3.49 7.43 6.78 5.76 7.22 4.20 3.47 3.35 3.874.29 4.01 4.05 4.19 4.63 4.07 3.74 3.50 5.09 4.71 5.46 4.62 8.43 8.54 8.24 8.70 – – – –2.78 2.49 2.37 2.50 3.21 2.48 2.38 2.87 2.77 2.59 2.87 3.33 3.44 3.61 3.22 3.42 3.52 3.52 3.39 3.2327.81 24.67 23.81 27.16 24.58 21.90 19.77 22.80 21.71 21.20 22.00 22.60 34.62 32.50 29.30 33.60 18.00 16.00 15.94 16.71.89 1.86 1.55 2.03 1.87 1.94 1.51 1.96 2.33 1.97 1.94 2.40 1.85 1.88 1.63 1.94 1.61 1.30 1.34 1.741.57 1.83 1.72 2.33 1.53 1.64 1.47 1.92 1.32 1.60 1.58 1.71 1.40 1.62 1.53 1.84 1.38 1.62 1.54 1.603254Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3233–3254

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3255–3268Additional records of Tettigoniidae from ArunachalPradesh, IndiaG. Srinivasan 1 & D. Prabakar 21,2Zoological Survey of India, 535, M-Block, New Alipore, Kolkata, West Bengal 700053, IndiaEmail: 1 zsisamy@rediffmail.com (corresponding author), 2 dprabakar14@gmail.comDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: R.K. AvasthiManuscript details:Ms # o2927Received 25 August 2011Final received 03 October2012Finally accepted 17 October 2012Citation: G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakar (2012).Additional records of Tettigoniidae from ArunachalPradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa4(14): 3255–3268.Copyright: © G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakar 2012.Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 UnportedLicense. JoTT allows unrestricted use of thisarticle in any medium for non-profit purposes,reproduction and distribution by providingadequate credit to the authors and the sourceof publication.Author Details: Dr. G. Sr i n i v a s a n is workingas Scientist-C in Zoological Survey of India,Kolkata. His area of research interest are in theBio-systematic studies of short horned and longhorned grasshoppers (Orthoptera), Phasmidsand Vespidae (Hymenoptera).Sh r i. D. Pr a b a k a r working as Assistant Zoologistat Zoological Survey of India, Southern RegionalCentre, Chennai. His area of research interestis in the bio-systematic studies of grasshoppers(Orthoptera).Author Contribution: See end of this article.Acknowledgements: We are grateful to Dr.K. Venkataraman, Director, Zoological Surveyof India, Kolkata for providing facilities to carryout the work. We are also thankful to Dr. G.Maheswaran, Officer-in-Charge, ArunachalPradesh Field Centre, Zoological Survey ofIndia, Itanagar for providing the specimens onloan for our studies.Abstract: Ten species of Tettigoniids under 10 genera belonging to five subfamilies ofthe family Tettigoniidae from Arunachal Pradesh are discussed of which five species arenew records to India and nine species are new records to Arunachal Pradesh.Keywords: Arunachal Pradesh, Chloracris, Khaoyaiana, Phyllozelus, Pseudophyllus,Onomarchus, Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae, Trachyzulpha,Bengali Abstract: %Ì[ýÓSç»Jô_ YÒãV` c÷c÷OãTö _=‘öç £gQÍö ×[ý×`rô Y†Yç_ Y×Ì[ý[ýçÌ[ý åGçœöÝÌ[ý %Üöï\ÇöNþ Ygç»Jô×»RôO %WýfY×Ì[ý[ýçÌ[ý\ÇöNþ 10×»RôO GS C YÒLç×TöÌ[ýa=‘öãµù %çã_ç×»JôTö c÷ãÌ^ä»K÷* AãVÌ[ý ]ãWýî Ygç»Jô×»RôO YÒLç×Tö \öçÌ[ýãTö YÒU] X×U\ÇöNþ c÷ãÌ^ä»K÷ A[ýe 9×»RôO YÒLç×Tö %Ì[ýÓSç»Jô_ YÒãVã` XTÇöX\öçã[ý X×U\ÇöNþ EõÌ[ýç c÷_*The state of Arunachal Pradesh is located in northeastern India, situatedbetween 26 0 28’–29 0 30’N and 91 0 30’–97 0 30’E and borders the states ofAssam and Nagaland to the south, and shares international borders withBhutan in the west, Myanmar in the east and the People’s Republic ofChina (PRC) in the north. Arunachal Pradesh is covered by the Himalaya.However, parts of Lohit, Changlang and Tirap are covered by the PatkaiHills. Kangto, Nyegi Kangsang, the main Gorichen Peak and the easternGorichen Peak are some of the highest peaks in this region of the Himalaya.At the lowest elevations, essentially at Arunachal Pradesh’s border withAssam, is Brahmaputra Valley with its semievergreen forests. Much ofthe state, including the Himalayan foothills and the Patkai Hills, are hometo eastern Himalayan broadleaf forests. Toward the northern border,with increasing elevation, comes a mixture of eastern and northeasternHimalayan subalpine conifer forests followed by the eastern Himalayanalpine shrub and meadows and ultimately rock and ice on the highestpeaks.Species of the family Tettigoniidae, known in American English askatydids and in British English as bush crickets, are very attractive inappearance. They are part of the suborder Ensifera and the only familyin the superfamily Tettigonioidea. They are also known as long hornedgrasshoppers although they are more closely related to crickets than tograsshoppers. They are widely distributed in tropical and subtropical partsof the world (Heller 1995). Tettigoniidae is a widely distributed familythat includes about 6000 species in 1070 genera (Otte 1997). Out of theseurn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:FFB58E61-6537-4F34-BC8A-8453F8C2F05EOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADAbbreviations: BMNH - Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom; LSUK- Linnean Society, United Kingdom, London; MZPW - Museum Ziemi PAN, Warsaw,Poland; MHNG - Museum d’histoire Naturelle in Geneva, Switzerland; MNHN - MuseumNational d’histoire Naturelle, Paris, France; NHMV - Naturhistorisches Museum Vienna;SMFD - Naturmuseum Senckenberg, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; ZMUM - ZoologicalMuseum University of Moscow; ZSI - Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, West Bengal,India.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268 3255

New tettigoniids of Arunachalonly 159 species of 72 genera are reported from India(Shishodia et al. 2010). The adults are small to large(15–120 mm) and poorly known from India.Some important works on the taxonomy anddistribution of Tettigoniidae of northeastern Indiainclude: Barman & Srivastava (1976), Shishodia(2000), Shishodia & Tandon (2000), Barman (2003),Shishodia et al. (2003, 2010), Kulkarni & Shishodia(2005), Senthilkumar et al. (2006), and Senthilkumar(2010). The present paper deals with 10 species. Theclassification is after Rentz (1979).Material and MethodsAll the specimens were handpicked during nightfrom the street lights and in the early morning fromthe vegetation. The collected specimens were killedby using ethyl acetate and preserved as dry specimens.The pinned specimens were subjected to taxonomicstudies by using Olympus SZX10 microscope.All the studied specimens are deposited at theArunachal Pradesh Regional Centre, ZoologicalSurvey of India, Itanagar (APRC/ZSI).Systematic accountOrder: OrthopteraSuborder: EnsiferaSuperfamily: TettigonioideaFamily: TettigoniidaeSubfamily: PhaneropterinaeGenus Khaoyaiana Ingrisch, 19901. Khaoyaiana nitens Ingrisch, 1990Genus Trachyzulpha Dohrn, 18922. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi Dohrn, 1892Subfamily: PseudophyllinaeGenus Chloracris Pictet & Saussure, 18923. Chloracris brullei, Pictet & Saussure, 1892Genus Pseudophyllus Serville, 18314. Pseudophyllus neriifolius (Lichtenstein, 1796)Genus Onomarchus Stål, 18745. Onomarchus uninotatus (Serville, 1838)Genus Phyllozelus Redtenbacher, 18926. Phyllozelus (Phyllozelus) siccus siccus (Walker,1869)Subfamily: ConocephalinaeGenus Euconocephalus Karny, 1907G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakar7. Euconocephalus indicus (Redtenbacher, 1891)Genus Pyrgocorypha Stål, 18738. Pyrgocorypha subulata (Thunberg, 1815)Subfamily: MecopodinaeGenus Mecopoda Serville, 18319. Mecopoda elongata elongata (Linnaeus, 1758)Subfamily: ListroscelidinaeGenus Hexacentrus Serville, 183110. Hexacentrus unicolor Serville, 1831Subfamily: PhaneropterinaeGenus Khaoyaiana Ingrisch, 19901. Khaoyaiana nitens Ingrisch, 1990 (Image 1)1990. Khaoyaiana nitens, Ingrisch,Senckenbergiana Biologica, 70(1–3): 107. Holotype,Male,Type locality: Thailand; SMFD Frankfurt.1994. Khaoyaiana nitens, Jin, Xingbao & K. L.Xia, Jour. Orth. Res., 3: 22.1998. Khaoyaiana nitens, Ingrisch & Shishodia,Mitt. Schweiz. Ent. Gesellsch., 71(3–4): 365.2000. Khaoyaiana nitens, Ingrisch & Shishodia,Mitt. Münch. Ent. Ges., 90: 20.2002. Khaoyaiana nitens, Ingrisch, EntomologicaBasiliensia, 24: 127.2004. Khaoyaiana nitens, Shishodia & Barman,Zool. Surv. India, State Fauna Series, Fauna ofManipur, 10 (2): 141.Material examined: One female, 15.xi.2006,Ganga Lake, Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh,India, 26 0 30’–29 0 30’N & 91 0 30’– 97 0 30’E, coll. G.Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2299/APRC/ZSI.Image 1. Khaoyaiana nitens Ingrisch, 1990© G. Srinivasan3256Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268

New tettigoniids of ArunachalDiagnosis: Fastigium conical, apex blunt, furroweddorsally; fastigium verticis slightly surpassing the rimof the antennal scrobae. Rounded eyes, little stronglyaccentuated. Antenna not surpassing the elytra. Discof pronotum smooth, more or less straight in front,with hind end convex. Sulcus short before the middle.Pronotum higher than long, hind end almost straight,lower rim wide rounded off with coarse. Prosternumunarmed. The wing hyaline, protruding part chitinousand glossy green. Legs with the following number ofspines on dorsal margins: profemur, mesofemur andpostfemur smooth; protibia smooth. The mesotibiais smooth on dorso-external and with two spines ondorso-internal side. The posttibia with 30 minute,distinct, black tipped external and 28 minute, distinct,black tipped internal spines. Legs with the followingnumber of spines on ventral margins: profemur andmesofemur smooth but the postfemur with fourminute, distinct, black tipped external and sevenminute, distinct, black tipped internal spines and withan apical spine; protibia with one external and twointernal, mesotibia with four minute, distinct, blacktipped external and four minute, distinct, black tippedinternal, posttibia with five distantly placed minute,distinct, black tipped ventro-external and 11 minute,distinct, black tipped ventro-internal and with a pairof apical spines on each side. Post tibiae on sidescompressed and spread out on all four sides. Supraanal plate long and triangular or tongue shaped; cercilong, lean gradually against the apex rejuvenatedand acuminate and symmetrical. Ovipositor broad.Dorsal valvula somewhat shorter than the ventralvalvula. On the dorsal part of the valvula are toothed,starting from middle part to apex at the ventral sideof the valvula. Subgenital plate long and wide basolaterally;basal triangular indented, lateral far raisedand apical supported. The tibial tympana open on boththe sides.Colouration: Green, glossy, ovipositor darkbrown.Measurements (in mm): Total Length 55; Body 22;Fastigium 3.5; Pronotum 9; Tegmen 43; Profemur 10;Mesofemur 7; Postfemur 28; Protibia 9; Mesotibia 6;Posttibia 30; Ovipositor 5.Distribution: India: Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur,Meghalaya and Mizoram; Bhutan; Central Thailand;China.Remarks: New record for Arunachal Pradesh.G. Srinivasan & D. PrabakarGenus Trachyzulpha Dohrn, 18922. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi Dohrn, 1892 (Image 2)1892. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi, Dohrn, Stett.Entomol. Z., 53: 68. Holotype, female, Type locality:Asia-Tropical, Malaysia, Jawa; (MZPW) Warsaw.1906. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi, Kirby, W.F. Asynonymic catalogue of Orthoptera (Orthoptera,saltatoria, Locustidae Vel Acrididae) 2: 408.1926. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi, Karny, Jour. Fed.Malay States mus. 13(2–3): 81.1936. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi, Heller, K.M. &K. Günther, Tijdschr. v. Entomologie 79: 74.1962. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi, Bei-Bienko,Trudy Zool. Inst. Akad. Nauk. SSSR, Leningrad. 30:124.1994. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi, Jin, Xinghao &Hsia, Jour. Orth. Res. 3: 24.Material examined: One male, 03.vi.2008, DFOQuarters, Jengging, East Siang District, ArunachalPradesh, India, 28 0 34’14.0’’N & 95 0 03’37.6’’E, coll.G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2300/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Fastigium sulcated, laterally compressedand conically produced with blunt apex, fastigiumverticis distinctly surpassing the rim of the antennalscrobae. Eyes are protruded. The anterior margin ofpronotum concave and posterior margin convex. Thepronotal margins expands like armour with the lateralcarinae denticulated. There is a clearly marked blackcolour “W-shaped” band attached with an inverted“V-shaped” structure on the dorsal side of the pronotalconstriction. The posterior margin of the pronotumappears black because it is dotted with black. The lowerhalf of the lateral sides of the pronotum is pale greenImage 2. Trachyzulpha fruhstorferi Dohrn, 1892© G. SrinivasanJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–32683257

New tettigoniids of Arunachaland the upper half is black. The prosternum unarmed.A pale coloured band runs on the ventral side of theabdomen. The radius sector two of the tegmina arisesbefore the middle. The hind femur with 10 spineson its external margin of the ventral side. The basalthree are small and the remaining spines are graduallyincreasing in their size with the space in betweenthem. No spines on the inner margin. A long apicalspine present on the external side and a short spine onthe internal side of the hind femur. The dorsal side ofthe hind femur is smooth. The dorsal side of hind tibiabearing six sickle-shaped spines on its external marginand 10 on its internal margin. The ventral side of thehind tibia has 11 normal shaped spines. The base ofthe spines is dark brown and the tips are red. The foretibia has three spines on the external margin, eightspines on the middle and 10 on the internal margin ofthe dorsal side. The subgenital plate broadest at thebase and then narrowed posteriorly. The lobes of theunited styli curved inward with a blunt end at the apex.The circus gradually narrowed, covered with spinules,bristles and curved at apex. The tibial tympana openon both the sides.Colouration: Body is green. The tegmina are greenwith five white-centered discontinuous transverseblack bands. The femur and tibia of the three pair oflegs are transversed with black and white colouredbands.Measurements (in mm): Total Length 58; Body23; Fastigium 2; Pronotum 8; Tegmen 45; Profemur9; Mesofemur; Postfemur 20; Protibia 7; Mesotibia;Posttibia 22.Distribution: India: Arunachal Pradesh; Indonesia:Java; Malaysia; Thailand.Remarks: New record for India.Subfamily: PseudophyllinaeGenus Chloracris Pictet & Saussure, 1892.3. Chloracris brullei Pictet & Saussure, 1892 (Image3)1892. Chloracris brullei, Pictet & Saussure,Iconographie des quelques sauterelles vertes, p. 22.Syntype, Male & female, Type locality: Asia-Tropical,Malaysia, Java, (MHNG) Geneva Museum.1895. Pseudophyllus brullei, Brunner VonWattenwyl, Verh. Der. Zoologish Botanischen.Gesellsch. Wien, 45: 37.1906. Chloracris brullei, Kirby, A synonymicG. Srinivasan & D. Prabakarcatalogue of orthoptera, 2: 294.1938. Chloracris brullei, De Jong, ZoologischeMededeelingen XXI: 9.1945. Chloracris brullei, De Jong, C. Zool.Mededelingen. (Leiden) 25: 5.1954. Chloracris brullei, Beier, Revision derPseudophyllinen 66.1995. Chloracris brullei Heller, K.G. Jour. Zool.,London, 237: 480.Material examined: One female, 15.xi.2006,Ganga Lake, Papumpare District, Itanagar, ArunachalPradesh, India, 26 0 30’–29 0 30’N & 91 0 30’–97 0 30’E,coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2301/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Fastigium, shortened apically, verticisconical, apex blunt, dorsally furrowed, slightlysurpassing the rim of the crowded antennal scrobae.The dorsal surface of pronotum smooth, bears twodistinct sutures. The lower margin of the lateralpronotum is undulated. Prosternum unarmed. Thechief specific characters of the species are those of theform of the tegmina and their venation. Absence ofocelli on the tegmen. This species should be identifiedafter the spines on their hind legs. The dorsal side ofthe hind femora is smooth. The number of spines onthe ventro-external margin of the hind femora is 13 andas a rule these spines are a little longer than the spinesof the internal margin. The number of smaller spineson the ventro-internal margin of the hind femora is 10.There are four spines on the dorso-internal margin ofthe hind tibia. The dorso-external margin of the hindtibia is smooth. The number of spines on the ventroexternalmargin of the hind tibia is eight. The numberof spines on the ventro-internal margin of the hind tibiaImage 3. Chloracris brullei, Pictet & Saussure, 1892© G. Srinivasan3258Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268

New tettigoniids of Arunachalis seven and as a rule these spines are a little smaller.The number of spines on the ventro-external marginof the mid leg femur is seven whereas five long spineson the internal margin and they are in equal distance.There are five very short spines on the ventro–internalmargin of the mid leg femur. There are only twospines on the dorsal side of the mid leg tibia. Thereare eight spines on the ventro–external margin and sixon the ventro–internal margin of the mid leg tibia. Thedorsal side of the fore femur smooth. There are fivespines on the ventro–internal margin of the hind femurand four spines on the ventro-external margin. Theventro-internal margin of the fore tibia has five spinesand six on the ventro-external margin. Tibial tympanaclosed on both the sides.Colouration: The general colour of the specimenis green.Measurements (in mm): Total length 116; Body 55;Fastigium 4; Pronotum 12; Tegmen 97; Profemur 14;Mesofemur 15; Postfemur 28; Protibia 11; Mesotibia14; Posttibia 26; Ovipositor 27.Distribution: India: Arunachal Pradesh; Indonesia:Borneo, Sumatra, Java; China; Malaysia.Remarks: New record for India.Genus Pseudophyllus Serville, 1831.4. Pseudophyllus neriifolius (Lichtenstein, 1796)(Image 4)1796. Locusta neriifolia, Lichtenstein, Cat. Mus.Zool. Hamburg 3: 82. Syntype, Female, Type locality:Asia-Tropical, Malaysia, Jawa, (ZMUM). Hamburg.1813. Gryllus Tettigonia neriifolius, Stål,Representation exactement colorée d’après nature desspectres ou phasmes, des mantes, des sauterelles, desgrillons, des criquets et des blattes: 11.1831. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, Serville, Ann. Sci.nat., 22(86): 143.1835. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, Brullé, In Audouin& Brullé. Histoire naturelle des insectes, 9[1](5):137.1838. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, Serville, Histoirenaturelle des insectes, Orthoptères, 466.1842. Locusta (Pseudophyllus) granigera, De Haan,In Temminck. Verhandelingen over de natuurlijkegeschiedenis der Nederlandsche overzeeschebezittingen Zoologie: 203.1862. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, Brunner vonWattenwyl, Abh. Zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, 12: 93.G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakar1892. Cleandrus neriifolius, Pictet & Saussure,Iconographie des quelques sauterelles vertes: 12.1895. Chloracris neriifolius, Brunner VonWattenwyl, Verh. Der Zoologisch–botanischenGesellsch. Wien 45: 36.1906. Cleandrus neriifolius, Kirby, A SynonymicCatalogue of Orthoptera (Orthoptera Saltatoria,Locustidae vel Acridiidae) 2: 295.1919. Cleandrus neriifolius, Dammerman,Landbouwdierkunde: 100.1924. Cleandrus neriifolius, Karny, Treubia 5(1–3): 173.1927. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, Caudell, Proc. U.S. Nation. Mus.71 (3), p. 32.1927. Cleandrus neriifolius, Karny, Ark. Zool.,19A(12): 7.1927. Cleandrus neriifolius, Ebner, Misc. Zool.Sumatrana, 20: 6.1938. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, De Jong,Zoologische Mededeelingen XXI: 14.1939. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, De Jong, C. Zool.Mededelingen (Leiden) 21: 14.1945. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, De Jong, C. Zool.Mededelingen (Leiden) 25: 6.1960. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, De Jong, C.Zoologische Verhandelingen 45: 7.1963. Pseudophyllus neriifolius, Beier, Orthopterumcatalogus 5: 15.Material examined: One male, 14.vi.2005,Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, India; ZSIQuarters Main gate, Itanagar, 27 0 5’–35 0 72’N &93 0 37’–30 0 72’E, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2302/APRC/ZSI.© G. SrinivasanImage 4. Pseudophyllus neriifolius (Lichtenstein,1796)Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–32683259

New tettigoniids of ArunachalDiagnosis: Fastigium verticis conical, dorsallyfurrowed, extends well beyond the rim of antennalscrobae. The species is easily known by the ratherinflated general shape, the granulated pronotum withan angulated hind border, granulated margins ofpronotum, the unicolourous vertex and the ocellateelytra. Prosternum unarmed. Meso and metasternumbroader than long; lobes angulated; metasternumnarrowing posteriorly. In the males the anteriorbranch of medial vein is bent anterior near the baseand the ocelliform markings are found between the twobranches of medial vein just behind this curved part ofthe anterior branch. The chief specific characters of thespecies are those of the form of the tegmina and theirvenation. This species should be identified after thespines on their hind legs. There are 13 spines on thedorsal side of the hind femora. The number of spineson the ventro-external margin of the hind femora is13 and as a rule these spines are a little longer. Thenumber of spines on the ventro-internal margin of thehind femora is 12. There are six spines on the dorsalside of the hind tibia among them the 1 st one is smalland the distance between the 1 st and 2 nd spine is veryless when compared to the distance between the rest ofthe spines i.e. from 2–6. The number of spines on theventro-external margin of the hind tibia is nine. Thenumber of spines on the ventro-internal margin of thehind tibia is nine and as a rule these spines are a littlesmaller. The number of spines on the ventro-externalmargin of the fore femur is seven whereas four longspines on the internal margin and they are in equaldistance. There are eight small spines on the ventrointernalmargin of the fore tibia and the basal threeare less in interspine distance when compare to theinterspine distance of 4 th –8 th spines. There are sevenspines on the ventro-external margin of the fore tibia.Tibial tympana closed on both the sides.Colouration: The general colour of the specimenis green.Measurements (in mm): Total length 123; Body 60;Fastigium 4; Pronotum 19; Tegmen 103; Profemur 15;Mesofemur 16; Postfemur 30; Protibia 15; Mesotibia14; Posttibia 28.Distribution: India: Arunachal Pradesh; Indonesia:Java and Sumatra.Remarks: New record for India.G. Srinivasan & D. PrabakarGenus Onomarchus Stål, 18745. Onomarchus uninotatus (Serville, 1838)(Image 5)1838. Pseudophyllus uninotatus, Serville, Histoirenaturelle des insectes. Orthoptères, p. 468. Holotype,Female, Type locality: MHNG, Geneva Museum.1842. Locusta (Pseudophyllus) leuconota var.b. leuconota, uninotata, De Haan, In Temminck.Verhandelingen over de natuurlijke geschiedenis derNederlandsche overzeesche bezittingen Zoologie: (necleuconotus Serv.), p. 204, pl.20, figs. 9 and 10.1862. Pseudophyllus uninotatus, Brunner vonWattenwyl, Abh. Zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 12: 93.1906. Cleandrus uninotatus, Kirby, A SynonymicCatalogue of Orthoptera (Orthoptera Saltatoria,Locustidae vel Acridiidae) 2: 295.1920. Pseudophyllus uninotatus Karny, Zool.Mededelingen (Leiden) 5(4): 208.1924. Cleandrus neriifolius uninotatus, Karny,Treubia 5(1–3): 174.1938. Onomarchus uninotatus, De Jong,Zoologische Mededeelingen, XXI: 26.1939. Pseudophyllus uninotatus, De Jong, Zool.Mededelingen (Leiden) 21: 26.1945. Onomarchus uninotatus, De Jong, Zool.Mededelingen (Leiden) 25: 6.1954. Onomarchus uninotatus, Beier, Revision derPseudophyllinen 60, 61.1960. Onomarchus uninotatus, De Jong, C.Zoologische Verhandelingen 45: 8.1962. Onomarchus uninotatus, Beier, Tierreich,73:45.1965. Onomarchus uninotatus, Weidner, Ent. Mitt.© G. SrinivasanImage 5. Onomarchus uninotatus (Serville, 1838)3260Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268

New tettigoniids of ArunachalZool. Museum Hamburg 3(53): 88.1990. Onomarchus uninotatus, Ingrisch,Senckenbergiana Biologica, 70(1–3): 133.1994. Onomarchus uninotatus, Jin, Xingbao & K.-L. Xia, Jour. Orth. Res. 3: 25.1995. Onomarchus uninotatus, Heller, K.-G., Jour.Zool., London, 237: 479.Material examined: Two females, 08.x.2004,Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, India; ZSIQuarters main gate, Itanagar, 27 0 5’–35 0 72’N & 93 0 37’–30 0 72’E, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2304/APRC/ZSI & IV/2305/APRC/ZSI. 1 Female, 09.xi.2005, EastKameng District, Arunachal Pradesh, India; Seijosa I.B, Pakke Tiger Reserve, 92 0 35’–93 0 10’N & 26 0 55’–27 0 15’E, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2306/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Fastigium verticis triangular, apexobtuse, dorsally furrowed, slightly surpassing rim ofantennal scrobae. No minute pits are found in thearea below the eyes. Pronotum smooth with veryfew isolated tubercles; with one transverse furrow inthe anterior half of the disc; anterior margin broadlyrounded, posterior margin angular; paranota acutetriangularin general outline but ventral margintruncate, latero-anterior margin faintly convex withvery faint sinuosities in ventral half, latero-posteriormargin concave. Tegmen broad, semitransparent,oval and of a pale green but rather narrow for thegenus; subcosta running distant from radius to behindbranching of radius sector, and after a short approachdeviating again; media with a sinuate curvature in basalarea. Prosternum unarmed. Meso and metasternumtransverse, mesosternum with a minute tubercleat anterior-lateral angle, metasternum narrowingposteriorly. The meso and metasternum together areabout as long as broad. Legs with the following numberof spines on ventral margins: profemur six indistinctexternal and seven indistinct internal, mesofemursix minute external and seven internal, postfemurfive indistinct, one minute and five large external, 13minute internal; protibia six minute external and sevenminute internal, mesotibia five minute external andfive indistinct internal, posttibia nine small externaland seven minute internal. All tibiae with two ventroapicalspurs, without dorsal spurs. Posttibia on dorsalmargins with six minute external and seven large andbroad internal spines. The hind tibiae bear a row ofstrong broadly based thorns on its dorsal margins,G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakarwhich are situated at equal distances. Tibial tympanaclosed on both the sides.Colouration: The general colour is green. In thefemales the tegmina has a distinct white spot nearthe base, situated between the radial and the medialvein. The pronotum is green. The head is yellowishgreen,the forehead is dark green, broadly borderedwith white along the genae. The clypeus, labrum andthe mandibulate are of a whitish-green. The generalcolour of the legs is of a greenish-grey shade, but themiddle femora and tibiae are white below.Measurements (in mm): Total length 90; Body 40;Fastigium 4; Pronotum 8; Tegmen 70; Profemur 9;Mesofemur 10; Postfemur 20; Protibia 9; Mesotibia10; Posttibia 20; Ovipositor 26.Distribution: India: Arunachal Pradesh; Australia;Indoensia: Java and Sumatra; Malaysia; Ambonia;Banka; Batoe Islands.Remarks: New record for India.Genus Phyllozelus Redtenbacher, 1892Subgenus Phyllozelus (Redtenbacher, 1892)6. Phyllozelus (Phyllozelus) siccus siccus (Walker,1869). (Image 6)1869. Pseudophyllus siccus, Walker, Cat. Derm.Salt. Brit. Mus., 2: 403. Holotype, female, Typelocality: Asia-Tropical, Indian Subcontinent, India(Chennai), (BMNH). London.1869. Pseudophyllus signatus, Walker, Cat. Derm.Salt. Brit. Mus., 2: 407.1893. Phyllozelus infumatus, Brunner VonWattenwyl, Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat. Giacomo DoriaGenova, Ser 2, 13(33): 174.© G. SrinivasanImage 6. Phyllozelus (Phyllozelus) siccus siccus (Walker,1869)Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–32683261

New tettigoniids of Arunachal1962. Phyllozelus siccus, Beier, Das Tierreich, 73:102.2003. Phyllozelus siccus, Barman, Zool. Surv.India, State Fauna series: Fauna of Sikkim, 9(2): 200.Material examined: One female, 15.xi.2006,Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, India; GangaLake, Itanagar, 26 0 30’N–29 0 30’N & 91 0 30’E–97 0 30’E,coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/ 2307/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Robust species. Fastigium verticisnarrow conical, dorsally furrowed, apex blunt, notsurpassing the rim of antennal scrobae. Pronotumnot roof–shaped, carinated and granulated with atransverse sulcus distinct on the disc and paranota,obsolete on lateral angles; margins of pronotum notgranulated; anterior margin sinuate, convex in middle,posterior margin broadly rounded but convex inthe middle; paranota about as high as long, anteriorand posterior angle almost rectangular. Prosternumarmed; meso and metasternum strongly transverse, allof them as long as wide, lobes blunt; Tegmen broadand leaf like, surpassing hind knees; radius sectorbranching slightly before the middle of tegmen length,forked. The cubitus of Tegmina pedunculate basally.This species is easily known by the curious rugoseerosion path in the anal area of the tegmina and by thepeculiar venal pattern. The subcostal and radial veinsdiverge about the same place, where the branch of theradial vein finds its origin namely a little before themiddle of the tegmina. Hind wing caudate. Anteriorfemora compressed. Knee lobes of all legs bispinose.Legs with the following number of spines on ventralmargins: profemur no external and three indistinctinternal, mesofemur five minute external and seveninternal, postfemur one indistinct, 11 large, broadbased external and 11 large internal, mesotibia fiveminute indistinct external and seven minute internal,posttibia nine small external and seven minute internal.All tibiae with two ventro-apical spurs, without dorsalapical spurs. No spines on femur and tibia on the dorsalmargins. Tibial tympana closed on both the sides.Colouration: The species when at rest on leavescamouflage like a leaf and leafy green in colour. Thedorsal sides of meso and postfemur are blue in colourwith sky–blue dots in between and the ventral side islight yellow. The protibia and femur are green in colour.The meso tibia is green. The tip of the ovipositor isdark brown to black.Measurements (in mm): Total length 55; Body 35;G. Srinivasan & D. PrabakarFastigium 4; Pronotum 9; Tegmen 60; Profemur 10;Mesofemur 10; Postfemur 20; Protibia 9; Mesotibia10; Posttibia 19; Ovipositor 15.Distribution: India: Assam, Arunachal Pradesh,Sikkim and Tamil Nadu; Indonesia: Sumatra.Remarks: New record for Arunachal Pradesh.Subfamily: ConocephalinaeGenus Euconocephalus Karny, 19077. Euconocephalus indicus (Redtenbacher, 1891)(Image 7)1891. Conocephalus indicus, Redtenbacher, Verh.Zool.-bot. Ges. Wien, 41: 408, Lectotype, Male, Typelocality: Asia-Tropical, Indian Subcontinent, India,Himalaya. (NHMV).1979. Euconocephalus indicus, Winston J. Bailey,Aust. J. Zool., 27: 1032.1992. Euconocephalus indicus, Hebard, Proc.Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad., 74: 238.1998. Euconocephalus indicus, Ingrisch &Shishodia, Mitt. Schweiz. Ent. Ges., 71: 370.2000. Euconocephalus indicus, Ingrisch &Shishodia, Mitt. Munch. Ent. Ges., 90: 32.2004. Euconocephalus indicus, Shishodia &Barman, Zool. Surv. India, Fauna of Manipur, StateFauna series, 10(2): 143.Material examined: One female, 10.x.2005,Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, India; ItanagarZoological Park, 26 0 30’–29 0 30’N & 91 0 30’E–97 0 30’E,coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2308/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Fastigium short, as long as broad,surpassing the antennal sockets; apex of the fastigialvertex blunt, rounded; ventral notch clearly open,ventral tubercle small. Antennae not annulated.© G. SrinivasanImage 7. Euconocephalus indicus (Redtenbacher, 1891)3262Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268

New tettigoniids of ArunachalPronotum converging towards the posterior marginfrom the dorsal aspect, side keels deep and not markedlyelongate. Prosternum armed with a pair of spines.Anterior lobes of meso and metasternum rounded andthe posterior lobes are angulated. Forewings long,surpassing hind knees with the tip rounded. Radiussector two arise beyond the middle of the wing.Cubito–anal area of forewing not distinctly broadenedor rounded. All legs are long and slender. Post femoraarmed both externally and internally on the ventralaspect. Legs with the following number of spineson ventral margins: profemur no external and twoindistinct internal, mesofemur four minute externaland no internal, postfemur seven minute external and14 minute internal, protibia with six external and sixinternal, mesotibia with six external and six internal,posttibia 25 small external and 25 small internal. Alltibiae with two ventro–apical spurs and post tibiawith an apical spur on dorsal its margin. Postfemursmooth. Posttibia with the following number of spineson dorsal margins: 28 small external and 25 smallinternal. Ovipositor longer than the body and straight.The tibial tympana closed on both the sides.Colouration: General colouration green. Tip of thespines in both ventral margins of the post femur aredark brown in colour. Tip of the spines in both ventralmargins of the protibia, mesotibia and posttibia aredark brown in colour. Mandibles and hind femur arepale brown. There are 12–15 distinct black spots onthe posterior half of the tegmen.Measurements (in mm): Total Length 62; Body26; Fastigium 4; Pronotum 8; Tegmen 50; Profemur8; Mesofemur 10; Postfemur 28; Protibia 7; Mesotibia9; Posttibia 26; Ovipositor 30.Distribution: India: Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur,Meghalaya, Mizoram and Odisha; Australia; China;Myanmar; Thailand; Malaysia: Penang, Peak Dovens;Indonesia: Java, Borneo and Sumatra.Remarks: New record to Arunachal Pradesh.Genus Pyrgocorypha Stål, 18738. Pyrgocorypha subulata (Thunberg, 1815)(Image 8)1815. Conocephalus subulatus, Thunberg, Mem.Acad. Imp. Sci. St. Petersburg 5: 271.Syntype, Typelocality: Oriental region, (BMNH) London.1874. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Stal, Recencioorthopterum. Revue Critique des orthopteres decritsG. Srinivasan & D. Prabakarpar Linne, De Geer et. Thunberg, 2 Locustina: 107.1891. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Redtenbacher, Verh.der Zoologisch–Botanischen Gesellsch. Wien 41: 372,374.1893. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Brunner VonWattenwyl, Ann. Mus.Civ.Stor. Nat. Genova. 213: (33)179.1906. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Kirby, A synonymiccatalogue of orthoptera (Orthoptera, saltatoria,Locustidae Vel Acrididae) 2: 239.1912. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Karny, GeneraInsectorum. 139: 26.1926. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Karny, Treubia 9(1–3): 240.1955. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Bei–Bienko,Zoologischeskii. Zhurnal 34: 1263.1957. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Bei–Bienko,Entomologicsheskoe obozrenie 36: 413.1990. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Ingrisch,Senckenbergiana Biologica 70(1–3): 116.1994. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Jin, Xingbao &Hsia, Jour. Orth. Res. 3: 15–41.2002. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Ingrisch,Entomological Basiliensia 24: 113.2008. Pyrgocorypha subulata, Buzzetti & Devriese,Bull.Mus. Civ. St. nat. Verona. 32: 162.Material examined: One female, 15.vi.2005,Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, India;Itanagar Zoological Park, 26 0 30’N–29 0 30’N &91 0 30’E–97 0 30’E, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No.IV/2309/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Fastigium long and conical, narrowingtowards the tip; apex of the fastigial vertex acute,Image 8. Pyrgocorypha subulata (Thunberg, 1815)© G. SrinivasanJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–32683263

New tettigoniids of Arunachalwith the ventral notch clearly open, ventral tuberclesmall. Pronotum diverging towards the posteriormargin from the dorsal aspect, lateral keels shallowand not markedly elongate. Prosternum armed with apair of spines. Forewings long with the tip rounded.Cubito-anal area of forewing not distinctly broadenedor rounded. The pro femur has a single spine on itsexternal margin and three spines on the internal marginon the ventral side. Hind femora armed both internallyand externally on the ventral side. There are 13 spineson the external margin whereas seven spines on theinternal margin. The distance between the spines onthe external margin is lesser than the internal margin.There are seven spines on the internal margin of thepro tibia on the ventral aspect; the distance betweenthe first four and the last two are somewhat lesser thanthe distance between the 5 th and 6 th . The protibia hasfive spines on the internal margin and four spines onthe external margin on the ventral side. The profemurand the protibia are smooth on the dorsal side. Thetibial tympana closed on both the sides.Colouration: Body green. A prominent whitecoloured band bordered with many black dots runsalong the lower margin of the cubito–anal area of thetegmina. The fore legs are yellow.Measurements (in mm): Total Length 71; Body 35;Fastigium 5.5; Pronotum 10; Tegmen 53; Profemur 9;Mesofemur 11; Postfemur 23; Protibia 7; Mesotibia 9;Posttibia 21; Ovipositor 28.Distribution: India: Arunachal Pradesh; Bhutan:Bhamo; China; Malaysia; Myanmar; Indonesia: Java.Remarks: New record for India.Subfamily: MecopodinaeGenus Mecopoda Serville, 18319. Mecopoda elongata elongata (Linnaeus, 1758)(Image 9)1758. Gryllus (Tettigonia) elongatus, Linnaeus,Systema Naturae per Regna tria naturae (10 th ed.) 1:429. Syntype, Female, Type locality: Asia-Tropical,Indian subcontinent, India, (LSUK) London LinneanSociety.1763. Gryllus javanus, Johannson, In Linnaeus,Amoenitates Academicae seu dissertations variaePhysicae Medicae, Botanicae anthehac seorsumeditae (2 nd ed.) 6: 398.1767. Gryllus (Tettigonia) elongatus, Linnaeus,Systema Naturae per Regna tria naturae (12th ed.) 1,G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakarpt. 2: 696.1813. Gryllus (Tettigonia) ferruginea, Stoll,Spectres on Phasues des Mantes, des Sauterelles, 2:9.1813. Gryllus (Tettigonia) rufa, Stoll, Spectres onPhasues des Mantes, des Sauterelles, 2: 13.1815. Locusta scalaris, Thunberg, Mem. Acad. Sci.St. Petersb., 5: 282.1831. Mecopoda maculata, Serville, Ann. Sci. nat.(Zool.), Paris, 22: 155.1835. Mecopoda virens, Brulle, In Audauin &Brulle, Histoire naturelle des Insects, 9(1) (5): 140.1835. Mecopoda virens, Brulle, Histoire naturelledes Insects, Paris, 9: 140.1842. Locusta (Mecopoda) javana, Haan, Gesch.Ned. Overszee. Bezitt, 2: 187.1869. Decticus tenebrosus, Walker, Cat. Derm.Salt. Brit. Mus.,: 262.1869. Lucera bicoloripes, Walker, Cat. Derm. Salt.Brit. Mus.,: 265.1906. Mecopoda elongata, Kirby, Syn. Cat.Orthopt., 2:3641922. Mecopoda elongata, Hebard, Proc. Acad.Nat. Sci. Philad., 74: 182.1924. Mecopoda elongata servillei, Karny,Meconeminen Ttreubia, 5: 159.1976. Mecopoda elongata, Barman & Srivastava,Newsl. Zool. Surv. India, 2(3): 93.1993. Mecopoda elongata, Barman, Zool. Surv.India, State Fauna series, Fauna of West Bengal, 3(4): 363.1995. Mecopoda elongata, Barman, Zool. Surv.India, State Fauna series, Fauna of Meghalaya 4(3):288.2000. Mecopoda elongata, Ingrisch & Shishodia,Mitt. Munch. Ent. Ges., 90: 21.2000. Mecopoda elongata, Shishodia, Rec. Zool.Surv. India, 98(3): 14.2000. Mecopoda elongata, Barman, Zool. Surv.India, State Fauna series, Fauna of Tripura, 7(2):265.2001. Mecopoda elongata, Shishodia & Kulkarni,Zool. Surv. India, Fauna of Conservation Area Series,Fauna of Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, 11: 62.2002. Mecopoda elongata, Ingrisch, EntomologicaBasiliensia, 24: 128.2003. Mecopoda elongata, Barman, Zool. Surv.India, State Fauna series, Fauna of Sikkim, 9(2): 195.3264Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268

New tettigoniids of Arunachal2004. Mecopoda elongata, Shishodia & Barman,Zool. Surv. India, Fauna of Manipur, State Faunaseries, 10(2): 142.2005. Mecopoda elongata, Kulkarni & Shishodia,Zool. Surv. India, Conservation Area Series, Fauna ofMelghat Tiger Reserve, 24: 325.2006. Mecopoda elongata, Shishodia, Zool. Surv.India, State Fauna series, Fauna of Nagaland, 12: 90.2007. Mecopoda elongata, Chandra et al., Zoos’Print Journal, 22(5): 2684.2009. Mecopoda elongata, Gupta & Shishodia,Zool. Surv. India, Conservation Area Series: Fauna ofPachmarhi Biosphere Reserve, 39: 62.Material examined: One female, 03.x.2004,Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, India; ZSIQuarters main gate, Itanagar, 27 0 5’–35 0 72’N & 93 0 37’–30 0 72’E, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2310/APRC/ZSI. One female, 05.x.2004, Papumpare District,Arunachal Pradesh, India; ZSI Quarters main gate,Itanagar, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2311/APRC/ZSI. One female, 10.x.2005, Papumpare District,Arunachal Pradesh, India; Itanagar Zoological Park,Itanagar, 26 0 30’ –29 0 30’N & 91 0 30’–97 0 30’E, coll. G.Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2312/APRC/ZSI. One female,09.xi.2005, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh,India; Khari I.B, Seijosa, Pakke Tiger Reserve 92 0 35’–93 0 10’N & 26 0 55’–27 0 15’E, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2313/APRC/ZSI. One female, 12.xi.2005,East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh, India;Khari I.B, Seijosa, Pakke Tiger Reserve, Coll. G.Srinivasan, Reg. No. IV/2314/APRC/ZSI. One female,12.xi.2005, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh,India; Khari I.B, Seijosa, Pakke Tiger Reserve, coll.G. Srinivasan, Reg. No. IV/2315/APRC/ZSI. One© G. SrinivasanImage 9. Mecopoda elongata elongata (Linnaeus, 1758)G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakarfemale, 21.x.2007, Papumpare District, ArunachalPradesh, India; ZSI Quarters main gate, Itanagar, coll.G. Srinivasan, Reg.No. IV/2316/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Body very large; fastigium wide, notsurpassing the antennal sockets; vertex blunt; headmore or less rounded; antennae strongly margined;Pronotum divided into three parts by two transversesulci, narrowed anteriorly, granulated; anteriormargin concave; posterior margin convex; posteriorend of pronotum almost double the width than theanterior region. Prosternum with a pair of longspines. The lateral lobes of meso and meta sternumrounded anteriorly and bifurcated posteriorly in themiddle. Wings fully developed; Tegmen surpassinghind knees; subcosta sharply sinuate just beyond themiddle; Hind wings caudate. Post femora and tibiaevery long and large; All other legs are long and slender.Post femora armed both externally and internally onthe ventral side. Legs with the following number ofspines on ventral margins: profemur and mesofemursmooth, postfemur with six large external and eightlarge internal, protibia with 10 small external and 11small internal, mesotibia with 10 small external and10 small internal, posttibia with 15 minute externaland 15 minute internal. All tibiae with ventro-apicalspurs and dorso–apical spurs on their margins. Femurof all the legs smooth on their dorsal side. Femoraof all the legs smooth and indentate. Tibiae of allLegs with the following number of spines on dorsalmargins: Protibia with eight minute external and fiveminute internal, mesotibia with 11 small external andnine small internal, posttibia with 23 small externaland 23 small internal spines. Ovipositor long andstraight. Male subgenital plate developed conicallyfrom region of bifurcation; ovipositor straight beingslightly narrowed at apex. Tibial tympana opened onboth the sides.Colouration: Female: Brown to dry leave colour.Tegmina with 4–6 black and white spots in the middle.Lateral lobes of pronotum dark-brown at least onupper margin. Male: Green in colour. Tegmina with4–6 white spots in the middle. Tip of spines on thelegs are dark brown to black in both the sexes.Measurements (in mm): Total Length 75–83; Body26–31; Fastigium 3–3.5; Pronotum7–10; Tegmen 66–75; Profemur 11–18; Mesofemur 15–19; Postfemur53–56; Protibia 11–18; Mesotibia 15–20; Posttibia54–56; Ovipositor 26–35.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–32683265

New tettigoniids of ArunachalDistribution: India: Andaman & Nicobar Islands,Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, HimachalPradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra,Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha,Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh andWest Bengal; Aru Islands; Australia; Celebes; China;Indonesia: Borneo, Sunda Islands; Japan, Malaca;Malaysia; Moluccas; New Guinea; Philippines;SIngapore; Taiwan; Thailand; Tonkin.Remarks: Barman & Srivastava (1976) reportedthis species from Kameng and Siang districts ofArunachal Pradesh.Subfamily: ListroscelidinaeGenus Hexacentrus Serville, 183110. Hexacentrus unicolor Serville, 1831 (Image 10)1831. Hexacentrus unicolor, Serville, Ann. Sci. nat.22(86): 146. Syntype, Type locality: Asia–Tropical,Malaysia, Jawa; BMNH, London.1838. Locusta unicolor, Serville, Histoire naturelledes insects. Orthopteres 531.1891. Hexacentrus unicolor, Redtenbacher, Verh.Der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellsch. Wien 41:548,552.1893. Hexacentrus unicolor, Brunner VonWattenwyl, Ann. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat. Genova 213(33):181.1897. Hexacentrus unicolor, Griffini, Misc. Entom.5911–120: 140.1906. Hexacentrus unicolor, Kirby, A SynonymicCatalogue of Orthoptera (Orthoptera, Saltatoria,Locustidae Vel Acrididae) 2: 287.1912. Hexacentrus unicolor, Karny, GeneraInsectorum 131: 16.1915. Hexacentrus unicolor, Karny, SupplementaEntomologica 4: 74.1922. Hexacentrus unicolor, Hebard, Proc. Acad.Nat. Sci. Philad. 74: 269.1923. Hexacentrus unicolor, Karny, Jour. Roy.Asiat. Soc. Malay. Branch 1: 182.1926. Hexacentrus unicolor, Karny, Jour. Fed.Malay. States mus. 13(2–3): 144.1927. Hexacentrus unicolor, Caudell, Proc. U.S.Nation. Mus. 71(3): 1–42.1929. Hexacentrus unicolor, Bei–Bienko, Ann.Mag.nat. Hist. 104: 543.1931. Hexacentrus unicolor, Karny, Treubia 12(Suppl.): 95.G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakar1933. Hexacentrus unicolor, Willemse, C, mem.Mus. r. hist.nat. Belgique 4(8): 17.1935. Hexacentrus unicolor, Wu, CatalogusInsectorum Sinensium (Catalogue of Chinese insects)103.1936. Hexacentrus unicolor, Tinkham, LingnanSci. J. 15 (2): 213.1939. Hexacentrus unicolor, Ebner, Lingnan Sci. J.18: 297.1941. Hexacentrus unicolour, Furukawa, Zool.Mag. 53(7): 368.1943. Hexacentrus unicolor, Tinkham, notes Ent.Chinoise 10(2): 51.1986. Hexacentrus unicolor, Heller, J. Exp. Biol.126: 97–109.1986. Hexacentrus unicolor, Inagaki, Matsuura &T. Sugimoto, Comptes rendus des séances de la societede biologie et de ses filiales 180(5): 589–592.1990. Hexacentrus unicolor, Ingrisch,Senckenbergiana Biologica 70(1–3): 128.1990. Hexacentrus unicolor, Lee, Insecta Koreana7: 108.1998. Hexacentrus unicolor, Ingrisch & Shishodia,Mitt. Schweiz. Ent. Gesellsch. 71(3–4): 370.1998. Hexacentrus unicolor, Warchalowska: Siwa,Folia biologica (Krakow) 46: 161.2000. Hexacentrus unicolor, Ingrisch & Shishodia,Mitt. Munch. Ent. Ges. 90: 35.2001. Hexacentrus unicolor, Ingrisch & Garai,Esperiana 8: 756.2001. Hexacentrus unicolor, Kim & Kim, KoreanJ. Entomol. 31(3): 162.2004. Hexacentrus unicolor, Shishodia & Barman,Zool. Surv. India, State Fauna Series, Fauna ofManipur, 10 (2): 142.2005. Hexacentrus unicolor, Wang, Jianfeng &Shi, Acta Entomol. Sin. 48(2): 243.2006. Hexacentrus unicolor, Shishodia, Zool. Surv.India , State Fauna Series, Fauna of Nagaland, 12:92.2007. Hexacentrus unicolor, Storozhenk & Paik,Orthoptera of Korea, 60.2010. Hexacentrus unicolor, Tan, Nature inSingapore, 3: 73, 79 (photos).2010. Hexacentrus unicolor, Tan, Nature inSingapore, 3: 246, 262. (photos).Material examined: One female, 20.x.2004,Papumpare District, Arunachal Pradesh, India; ZSI3266Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268

New tettigoniids of ArunachalImage 10. Hexacentrus unicolor Serville, 1831© G. SrinivasanQuarters main gate, Itanagar, 27 0 5’–35 0 72’N & 93 0 37’–30 0 72’E, coll. G. Srinivasan, Reg No. IV/2317/APRC/ZSI. One fmale, 10.x.2005, Papumpare District,Arunachal Pradesh, India; Itanagar Zoological Park,Itanagar, 26 0 30’N–29 0 30’N & 91 0 30’E–97 0 30’E, coll.G. Srinivasan, Reg. No. IV/2318/APRC/ZSI.Diagnosis: Fastigium verticis narrow, conical, apexacute. Pronotum longer than broad, disc concave inanterior and posterior area, anterior margin of paranotarounded and the posterior margin angulated; there arethree sulci found on the disc; the upper one is ‘U’shaped, the middle one is transverse, straight and thelower one is in an inverted ‘U’ shaped. Pro, meso andmeta sternum are each provided with a pair of spikelikeprocesses. Tegmen surpassing hind knees; radiussector branching at the hind portion of the tegmen,forked, stem of radius with three more branches. Hindwing caudate. Anterior coxa without spine. Anteriorfemur slightly compressed. Knee lobes of pro andmeso femur are smooth. Legs with the followingnumber of opposing spines on ventral margins: proand meso femur smooth. Left Protibia with six long,external and five long, internal and right protibia withfive long, external and six long, internal spines oneach margin; mesotibia with six long, external and fivelong, internal spines; hind knee lobes with a spine oneach side; hind femora with widely spaced big spinesand between them lie small spines; hind tibiae withsmall spines on dorsal and ventral face externally andinternally. Epiproct triangular, apex obtuse. Cerciconical, apex pointing. Subgenital plate triangular,with a slight medial furrow apex obtuse. Ovipositorfalcate, broad at base and pointed at apex, marginssmooth. Tibial tympana closed on both the sides.G. Srinivasan & D. PrabakarColouration: General colour green. A specialdark brown coloured band covers the pro, meso andmetanotum.Measurements (in mm): Total Length 48; Body 20;Fastigium 2.5; Pronotum 6.5; Tegmen 40; Profemur8.5; Mesofemur 9.5; Postfemur 22; Protibia 8.5;Mesotibia 10; Posttibia 21; Ovipositor 10.2.Distribution: India: Andaman & Nicobar Islands,Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Manipur,Mizoram, Nagaland and Sikkim; Celebes; China;Indonesia: Borneo and Sumatra; Japan; Malaysia;Moluccas; Myanmar; Philippines; Singapore; Taiwan;Thailand.Remarks: New record for Arunachal Pradesh.SummaryTotally 10 species of tettigoniids are discussed inthis paper. Among them nine species are new recordsto the state of Arunachal Pradesh and five species arereported for the first time from India.REFERENCESBarman, R.S. (2003). Insecta: Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae.Zoological Survey of India, Fauna of Sikkim, State FaunaSeries 9(2): 193–201.Barman, R.S. & G.K. Srivastava (1976). On a collectionof Tettigoniidae (Insecta) from Arunachal Pradesh, India,Zoological Survey Newsletter 2(3): 93–94.Heller, K.G. (1995). Acoustic signaling in palaeotropical bush–crickets (Orthoptera, Tettigonioidea, Pseudophyllidae):does predation pressure by eavesdropping enemies differ inthe palaeotropics and neotropics. Journal of Zoology 237:469–485.Kulkarni & M.S. Shishodia (2005). Insecta: Orthoptera.Zoological Survey of India, Fauna of Melghat TigerReserve, Conservation Area Series 24: 324.Otte, D. (1997). Tettigonioidea. Philadelphia: Academy ofNatural Sciences. Orthoptera Species File. 7.Rentz, D.C.F. (1979). Comments on the Classification of theOrthoptera Family Tettigoniidae, with a key to Subfamiliesand description of two New Subfamilies. Australian Journalof Zoology 27: 991–1013.Senthilkumar, N., N.D. Barthakur & N.J. Borah (2006).Fauna of Protected Areas - 29. Orthopteran fauna of theGibbon Wildlife Sanctuary, Assam. Zoos’ Print Journal21(8): 2347–2349.Senthilkumar (2010). Orthopteroids in Kaziranga NationalPark, Assam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2(10):1227–1231.Shishodia, M.S. (2000). Short and Long–horned grasshoppersJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–32683267

New tettigoniids of ArunachalG. Srinivasan & D. PrabakarKey to the subfamilies of the family Tettigoniidae of Arunachal Pradesh1. Male subgenital plate with a pair of styles; first two tarsi grooved laterally .................................................... 2– Male subgenital plate without style; first two tarsi without groove laterally.....................Phaneropterinae2. Fore tibia with short immovable spines on its ventral margins ....................................................................... 3– Fore tibia with long movable spines on its ventral margins .............................................. Listroscelidinae3. Tibial auditory structure opened on both the sides .............................................................. Mecopodinae– Tibial auditory structure closed on both the sides ............................................................................................ 44. The mouth of the tibial auditory structure is slit-like on both the sides .................................... Conocephalinae– The mouth of the tibial auditory structure is wide on both the sides ............................... PseudophyllinaeKey to the genera of the subfamily Phaneropterinae from Arunachal Pradesh1. Fastigium verticis slightly surpassing the rim of the antennal scrobae. Disc of pronotum smooth. Post tibiabears simple spines ......................................................................................................... Khaoyaiana Ingrisch.2. Fastigium verticis distinctly surpassin the rim of the antennal scrobae. The pronotal disc marginsexpands like armour with the lateral carinae denticulated. Post tibia bears sickle-shaped spines........................................................................................................................................... Trachyzulpha Dohrn.Key to the genera of the subfamily Pseudophyllinae of Arunachal Pradesh1. Fastigium verticis not surpassing the rim of antennal scrobae ............................ Phyllozelus Redtenbacher– Fastigium verticis surpassing the rim of antennal scrobae ............................................................................. 22. Fastigium verticis surpassing well beyond to the rim of the antennal scrobae ............. Pseudophyllus Serville.– Fastigium verticis surpassing slightly beyond the rim of antennal scrobae .................................................... 33. Fastigium verticis blunt, and the apex far to the rim of antennal scrobae................. Chloracris Pictet & Saussure– Fastigium verticis obtuse and the apex near to the rim of antennal scrobae ..................... Onomarchus Stal.Key to the genera of the subfamily Conocephalinae of Arunachal Pradesh1. Fastigium short, as long as broad; apex of the fastigial vertex blunt, rounded. Protibia with 6 external and6 internal spines on its ventral margins ....................................................................... Euconocephalus Karny.2. Fastigium long and conical, narrowing towards the tip; apex of the fastigial vertex acute. Protibia with 5 externaland 7 internal spines on its ventral margins ....................................................................... Pyrgocorypha Stal.and Crickets of Bastar district, Madhya Pradesh, India. Records of ZoologicalSurvey of India 8(1): 27–80.Shishodia, M.S., A. Dey & S.K. Tandon (2003). Insecta: Orthoptera: Acridioidea andEumastacoidea. Zoological Survey of India, Fauna of Sikkim, State Fauna Series7(2): 165–192.Shishodia, M.S. & S.K. Tandon (2000). Insecta: Orthoptera: Acridioidea andEumastacoidea. Zoological Survey of India, Fauna of Tripura, State Fauna Series7(2): 197–230.Shishodia, M.S., K. Chandra & S.K. Gupta (2010). An Annotated Checklist oforthoptera (Insecta) from India. Records of Zoological Survey of India, Occasionalpaper No. 314: 283–324.Author Contribution:The Study: GS has done the Survey, Fieldphotography, collection and the preservationof the specimens. DP has assisted in thepreparation of the manuscript. Current paper:GS has done identification, preparation ofvarious identification keys. DP has also assistedin preparation of the identification keys and themanuscript.3268Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3255–3268

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3269–3283Western GhatsSpecial SeriesBirds of lower Palni Hills, Western Ghats, Tamil NaduTharmalingam Ramesh 1 , J. Peter Prem Chakravarthi 2 , S. Balachandran 3 & Riddhika Kalle 41,4Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, P.O. Box 18, Dehra Dun, Uttarakhand 248001, India1,2,3Bombay Natural History Society, Hornbill House, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400001, India4B-1, Prerana Mandir, S.V. Road, Santacruz(W), Mumbai, Maharashtra 400054, IndiaEmail: 1 ramesh81ngl@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 peterpremcj@gmail.com, 3 bnhsbala@rediffmail.com, 4 riddhikalle@gmail.comDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: Kumaran SathasivamManuscript details:Ms # o3051Received 02 January 2012Final received 14 May 2012Finally accepted 10 October 2012Citation: Ramesh, T., J.P.P. Chakravarthi, S.Balachandran & R. Kalle (2012). Birds of lowerPalni Hills, Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu. Journalof Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3269–3283.Copyright: © Tharmalingam Ramesh, J. PeterPrem Chakravarthi, S. Balachandran & RiddhikaKalle 2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricteduse of this article in any medium for non-profitpurposes, reproduction and distribution byproviding adequate credit to the authors and thesource of publication.Author Details and Author Contribution: seeend of this article.Acknowledgements: The Ministry ofEnvironment and Forest, Government of Indiais greatly acknowledged for funding our researchactivities in the Palni Hills. We thank the Director,Bombay Natural History Society and TamilNadu Forest Department for granting us thepermission to carry out our study in the PalniHills. We are indebted to our field assistantsand forest department staff for their help andlogistic support.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:04D8DDC9-2797-4E38-BA36-72C91C3F94EEOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADAbstract: The current altitudinal distribution and breeding observations on birds of lowerPalni Hills, Western Ghats were documented by conducting road transects, opportunisticsurveys including trail walks and mist netting. A total of 196 species belonging to 63families were recorded during the study. The Accipitridae family was foremost inspecies richness, followed by Cuculidae and Muscicapidae, Picidae, Timaliidae andother families. Altitudinal distribution of birds was higher between 600 and 900 m.The general patterns of the decreasing species richness with increasing altitude wereobserved in mid and upper Palnis. This could be probably because the lower Palnishave more deciduous and scrub forest which can support high food availability. Residentand migrant species made up to 87.76% and 12.24% of the community, respectively.We recorded a species that was threatened, three nearly threatened, and five endemicto the Western Ghats. Most of the endemics were confined to the higher altitudes dueto the presence of moist evergreen and high altitude montane forests and grasslands.In total, 51 breeding bird observations were recorded. Interestingly, the variation in thebreeding season of some birds was noticed with respect to earlier studies. Overall, ourstudy illustrated useful information on bird community in this region which serves as abaseline for future monitoring programs.Keywords: Altitudinal distribution, breeding birds, lower Palni Hills, Western Ghats.IntroductionBirds are ideal bioindicators and useful models for studying a varietyof environmental problems, hence the condition of local landscape mustbe investigated to identify crucial determinants of the bird communitystructure for avian conservation (Kattan & Franco 2004). Describingand explaining spatial patterns in species diversity are crucial steps inconserving global biodiversity (Lee et al. 2004) as the number of birdspecies inhabiting various altitudinal belts or ‘life zones’ (Ali 1949)depend on climatic changes accompanied by corresponding changes invegetation. Studies on species distribution along elevational gradients areessential to understand principles of community organisation and speciesconservation. The Western Ghats, identified as one of the biodiversityhotspots in the world, is a 1600-km long chain of mountain rangesrunning parallel to the western coast of the Indian peninsula (Pascal1988). Among the three distinct sections of the Western Ghats, the south-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, theGlobal Environment Facility, the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and theWorld Bank.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–3283 3269

Birds of lower Palni Hillseastern region has one of the richest tropical forests inthe country. The Western Ghats has nearly 508 birdspecies of which 3.5% are endemic out of more than1200 species in India (Rajmohana & Radhakrishnan2008). Apparently the Indian bird population has beendwindling due to direct/indirect impact from increasinghuman population (Balachandran et al. 2005), habitatloss, fragmentation, and severe biotic pressure,necessitating documentation of the current status ofbird species for future monitoring and conservation(Islam & Rahmani 2004). Bird community evaluationhas become an important tool in biodiversityconservation and for identifying conservation actionsin areas of high human pressure (Kremen 1992; Shafiqet al. 1997; Chettri et al. 2001; Ramesh et al. 2011).The avifaunal diversity of Palni Hills has beendocumented by various authors (Nichols 1937;Fairbank 1877; Terry 1887) and specific ecologicalstudies were carried out in the higher altitudes(Balachandran 1998; Robin & Sukumar 2002;Balachandran et al. 2005; Somasundaram & Vijayan2008). Apart from anecdotal observations on birds(Blanford 1867; Foulkes 1904; Navarro 1955, Fuller1958; Surendran 1973; Ananthasubramaniam 1979;Narayana 1979; Steele 1990), few studies involve birdringing techniques (Balachandran 1992) and a fewhave been monitored at low altitudes (Shahabuddin1997). However, little is known about the avifaunalT. Ramesh et al.status in the lower Palni Hills, from the foothills toan altitude of 900m above mean sea level. In order tofill up the lacunae, a short term survey was carried outto document the avifaunal altitudinal distribution andbreeding observations in the lower Palni Hills.Materials and MethodsStudy AreaPalni Hills is in the south-eastern part of theWestern Ghats Hotspot in Tamil Nadu. It lies between10.1 0 –10.26 0 N and 77.14 0 –77.52 0 E covering an areaof c. 2400km 2 (Image 1). It is one of the importantglobal biodiversity hotspots with high endemism.The Palni Hills have three well marked topographicdivisions, namely the lower (300–900 m), mid (>900–1800 m) and high Palnis (>1800–2500 m) for researchand administrative purposes (Balachandran et al.2005). Perennial rivers such as Mulayar and Arunganaland semiperennial rivers like Thalaiyar (Rat-tail Falls)(Balachandran et al. 2005) and Iruttar, are importantwater sources for the Manjalaar reservoir (situated at thefoothills of 300m elevation) and it is used for irrigationpurposes in the lower Palnis. The minimum recordedtemperature is about 8.3 0 C and the maximum goesup to 23 0 C. The annual average precipitation rangesfrom 800–1900 mm in the Palnis (Balachandran et al.Image 1. Location of intensive study area in lower Palni Hills, Western Ghats.3270Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–3283

Birds of lower Palni Hills2005). There are four seasons; Winter (December–March), Summer (April–June), southwest monsoon(June–September) and northeast monsoon (October–November). The climate is sub-tropical with majorvegetation types broadly classified into scrub forest,moist and dry deciduous forest of low and midelevations and montane evergreen forest of highelevations (Champion & Seth 1968). In addition tobirds, important mammals found in Palni are SambarRusa unicolor, Muntjac Muntiacus muntjak, Wild PigSus scrofa, Indian Chevrotain Tragulus meminna,Gaur Bos gaurus, Four-horned Antelope Tertracerusquadricornis, Nilgiri Tahr Nilgiritragus hylocrius,Tiger Panthera tigris, Leopard Panthera pardus,Dhole Cuon alpinus, Striped Hyena Hyaena hyaena,Golden Jackal Canis aureus and Grizzled GiantSquirrel Ratufa macroura (Prater 1971).The Manjalaar reservoir forms an important waterbody for water birds. Some parts of the river deltain lower Palnis constituted an endemic eco-regionwith very rare and endangered plants and animals ofIndia but now it has been modified with cultivation ofSilk Cotton Ceiba pentandra, Teak Tectona grandis,Mango Mangifera indica, Coffee Coffea arabica andCoconut Cocos nucifera. Expanding agricultural,urban, productive and developmental activitiescurrently threaten to take over Palni’s natural habitatand pose a threat to its preservation due to large-scaledeforestation. With human disturbance, the riparianforest patch is being converted on the slopes as acomplex mosaic of plantations such as mango groves,groundnut and pulses, secondary and native forests.This work is part of a long term research project“Revaluation of bird community structure of PalniHills with special reference to endemic and threatenedspecies” (Balachandran et al. 2005).Field surveyWe recorded sightings of birds in the lower Palnisfrom December 2004 to July 2005 and documented theoccurrence, altitudinal distribution and breeding. Thehighly mountainous terrain made it impossible to layline transects. Instead, we conducted road transectsin the lower Palnis from Palni Hill ConservationCouncil (PHCC), Kamakapatti to Poolathur roadjunction (16.5km). The road was divided into sixsegments of 2.5km each, including a segment of4km where each segment was sampled twice everyT. Ramesh et al.month in the mornings (06:00–10:00 hr) and evenings(16:00–18:30 hr). In addition, opportunistic roadsurveys, trail walks and mist netting were conductedto record bird species within a 3km radius from theregular road transect area. The five mist-nets wereoperated opportunistically at dawn from 06:00–09:00hr and in the evenings from 15:00–18:00 hr. Mist netswere visited every hour to check the trapped birds forcollection and identification. All nets were made ofblack nylon mesh size, 36mm with dimensions 2mhigh by 6m long.ResultsA total of 196 species belonging to 63 families wererecorded during the study (Table 1). All observationslisted in Table 1 have already been published in thesurvey report (Balachandran et al. 2005). Accipitridaefamily showed highest species richness (18 species),followed by Cuculidae and Muscicapidae (10 specieseach), Picidae, Timaliidae, (eight species each),Phasianidae and Pycnonotidae (seven species each),Ardeidae, Cisticolidae, Columbidae, Dicruridae,Estrildidae, Motacillidae and Nectariniidae (fivespecies each) and other families (less than five specieseach). Of the recorded species, 87.76% were residentand 12.24% migrants. In terms of frequency ofobservations, the majority of species were found to becommon (74.49%), followed by uncommon (19.90%)and rare (5.61%) species. In terms of altitude, speciesand families were seen between >600–≤700 m and>700–900 m respectively. The number of bird speciesobserved in each altitude zone were 128–≤400m,122–>400 to ≤ 500, 121–>500 to ≤600, 139–>600to ≤700, 131–>700 to ≤800 and 130–>800 to ≤900.During the study, a threatened species, three nearlythreatened and 192 least concerned species were alsorecorded. Among all the species, five were endemic tothe Western Ghats.Breeding observationsBreeding observations of 51 bird species are givenas follows:Shikra Accipiter badius: In the lower Palnis, (c.350m altitude) a mating pair was sighted on 3 February2005. On 25 February, its nest was noticed with an eggon an Ailanthus excelsa tree and was seen with twoJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–32833271

Birds of lower Palni HillsT. Ramesh et al.Table 1. List of birds observed in lower Palni Hills, Western GhatsFamily/Species common name Scientific name StatusAccipitridaeAltitude(in m)Frequencyof observation1 Black-shouldered Kite Elanus caeruleus R 320-900 C2 Oriental Honey-Buzzard Pernis ptilorhynchus R 600-900 UC3 Black Kite Milvus migrans R 300-900 C4 Brahminy Kite Haliastur indus R 300-900 C5 Shikra Accipiter badius R 300-900 C6 Crested Goshawk Accipiter trivirgatus R 300-900 C7 Besra Sparrowhawk Accipiter virgatus R 650 C8 White-eyed Buzzard Butastur teesa R 320 C9 Mountain Hawk-Eagle Spizaetus nipalensis R 415-900 UC10 Changeable Hawk-Eagle Spizaetus cirrhatus R 300-900 C11 Bonelli's Hawk-Eagle Hieraaetus fasciatus R 300-600 C12 Booted Eagle Hieraaetus pennatus M 300-600 UC13 Black Eagle Ictinaetus malayensis R 300-900 C14 Pallid Harrier Circus macrourus M,NT 320 R15 Montagu's Harrier Circus pygargus M 350 R16 Pied Harrier Circus melanoleucos M 800-900 UC17 Short-toed Snake-Eagle Circaetus gallicus R 300-600 UC18 Crested Serpent Eagle Spilornis cheela R 400-900 CAcrocephalidae19 Thick-billed Warbler Acrocephalus aedon M 320-500 UC20 Blyth's Reed-Warbler Acrocephalus dumetorum M 300-900 C21 Paddyfield Warbler Acrocephalus agricola M 300-500 CAegithinidae22 Common lora Aegithina tiphia R 300-900 CAlaudidae23 Jerdon's Bush-Lark Mirafra affinis R 320 C24 Ashy-crowned Sparrow-Lark Eremopterix grisea R 320 UC25 Eastern Skylark Alauda gulgula R 320 UCAlcedinidae26 Small Blue Kingfisher Alcedo atthis R 320-900 CAnatidae27 Northern Pintail Anas acuta M 300 UC28 Spot-billed Duck Anas poecilorhyncha R 300 CApodidae29 Indian Edible-nest Swiftlet Collocalia unicolor R 600-900 C30 White-rumped Needletail Zoonavena sylvatica R 630 UC31 House Swift Apus affinis R 320-640 C32 Asian Palm-Swift Cypsiurus balasiensis R 300-500 UCArdeidae33 Indian Pond-Heron Ardeola grayii R 300-900 C34 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis R 300 C35 Median Egret Mesophoyx intermedia R 300 C36 Large Egret Casmerodius albus R 300 UC3272Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–3283

Birds of lower Palni HillsT. Ramesh et al.Family/Species common name Scientific name StatusAltitude(in m)Frequencyof observation37 Little Egret Egretta garzetta R 300 CBucerotidae38 Malabar Grey Hornbill Ocyceros griseus R,E 800-900 CCampephagidae39 Pied Flycatcher-Shrike Hemipus picatus R 600-900 C40 Black-headed Cuckoo-Shrike Coracina melanoptera R 300-900 UC41 Scarlet Minivet Pericrocotus flammeus R 500-900 C42 Small MinivetCaprimulgidaePericrocotuscinnamomeusR 320-680 C43 Jerdon’s Nightjar Caprimulgus atripennis R 450-850 UC44 Common Indian Nightjar Caprimulgus asiaticus R 320-900 CCerylidae45 Lesser Pied Kingfisher Ceryle rudis R 300-900 CCharadriidae46 Red-wattled Lapwing Vanellus indicus R 300-900 C47 Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius R 300 CChloropseidae48 Gold-fronted Chloropsis Chloropsis aurifrons R 450-900 C49 Jerdon's ChloropsisCiconiidaeChloropsiscochinchinensisR 500-640 UC50 Painted Stork Mycteria leucocephala R,NT 300 UCCinclosomatidae51 Spotted Babbler Pellorneum ruficefs R 415-900 CCisticolidae52 Franklin's Prinia Prinia hodgsonii R 550-720 UC53 Plain Prinia Prinia inornata R 320-900 C54 Ashy Prinia Prinia socialis R 500-900 C55 Jungle Prinia Prinia sylvatica R 300-900 C56 Common Tailor Bird Orthotomus sutorius R 300-900 CColumbidae57 Blue Rock Pigeon Columba livia R 300-900 C58 Eurasian Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto R 320-400 UC59 Spotted Dove Streptopelia chinensis R 300-900 C60 Little Brown Dove Streptopelia senegalensis R 300-400 C61 Emerald Dove Chalcophaps indica R 500-900 CCoraciidae62 Indian Roller Coracias benghalensis R 300-350 CCorvidae63 Indian Treepie Dendrocitta vagabunda R 300-900 C64 House Crow Corvus splendens R 300-900 C65 Jungle Crow Corvus macrorhynchos R 300-900 CCuculidae66 Pied Crested Cuckoo Clamator jacobinus R 300-450 C67 Brainfever Bird Hierococcyx varius R 300-900 CJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–32833273

Birds of lower Palni HillsT. Ramesh et al.Family/Species common name Scientific name StatusAltitude(in m)Frequencyof observation68 Indian Cuckoo Cuculus micropterus R 640 C69 Indian Plaintive Cuckoo Cocamantis passerinus R 320 C70 Drongo Cuckoo Surniculus lugubris R 300-900 UC71 Asian Koel Eudynamys scolopacea R 300-900 C72 Small Green-billed Malkoha73 Sirkeer MalkohaPhaenicophaeusviridirostrisPhaenicophaeusleschenaultiiR 300-900 CR 300-900 C74 Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis R 300-900 C75 Lesser Coucal Centropus bengalensis R 300-900 CDicaeidae76 Thick-billed Flowerpecker Dicaeum agile R 400-600 C77 Tickell's Flowerpecker Dicaeum erythrorhynchos R 300-600 C78 Plain Flowerpecker Dicaeum concolor R 800-900 CDicruridae79 Black Drongo Dicrurus macrocercus R 300-500 C80 Ashy Drongo Dicrurus leucophaeus M 450-500 C81 White-bellied Drongo Dicrurus caerulescens R 320-700 C82 Bronzed Drongo Dicrurus aeneus R 900-1300 UC83 Greater Racket-tailed Drongo Dicrurus paradiseus R 750-1100 CEstrildidae84 White-throated Munia Lonchura malabarica R 300-600 C85 White-rumped Munia Lonchura striata R 300-900 C86 Black-throated Munia Lonchura kelaarti R 650-900 UC87 Spotted Munia Lonchura punctulata R 300-900 C88 Black-headed Munia Lonchura malacca R 300-600 CFalconidae89 Common Kestral Falco tinnunculus R 300-900 CHalcyonidae90 Stork-billed Kingfisher Halcyon capensis R 300 UC91 White-breasted Kingfisher Halcyon smrynensis R 300-900 CHemiprocnidae92 Crested Tree-Swift Hemiprocne coronata R 300-900 CHirundinidae93 Dusky Crag Martin Hirundo concolor R 800-900 C94 Common Swallow Hirundo rustica M 300-600 C95 Red-rumped Swallow Hirundo daurica R 320-900 CIrenidae96 Asian Fairy Bluebird Irena puella R 600-900 CLaniidae97 Bay-backed Shrike Lanius vittatus R 320 C98 Rufous-backed Shrike Lanius schach R 300-900 C99 Brown Shrike Lanius cristatus M 300-900 CMegalaimidae100 Brown-headed Barbet Megalaima zeylanica R 400-850 C101 White-cheeked Barbet Megalaima viridis R 700-900 C3274Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–3283

Birds of lower Palni HillsT. Ramesh et al.Family/Species common name Scientific name StatusAltitude(in m)Frequencyof observation102 Crimson-throated Barbet Megalaima rubricapilla R 700-900 C103 Coppersmith BarbetMegalaimahaemacephalaR 400-900 CMeropidae104 Chestnut-headed Bee-eater Merops leschenaulti R 400-900 C105 Small Bee-eater Merops orientalis R 300-450 C106 Blue-bearded Bee-eater Nyctyornis athertoni R(AM) 750-900 UCMonarchidae107 Asian Paradise-Flycatcher Terpsiphone paradisi R 300-900 C108 Black-naped Monarch-Flycatcher Hypothymis azurea R 600-900 CMotacillidae109 Paddy field Pipit Anthus rufulus R 300-900 C110 Forest Wagtail Dendronanthus indicus M 320-900 C111 Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava M 300-600 C112 Grey Wagtail Moticella cinerea M 500-900 UC113 Large Pied WagtailMuscicapidaeMoticellamaderaspatensisR 300-900 UC114 Asian Brown Flycatcher Muscicapa dauurica M 450-700 C115 Brown-breasted Flycatcher Muscicapa muttui M 500-900 UC116 Blue-throated Flycatcher Cyornis rubeculoides R(AM) 650 R117 Tickell's Blue-Flycatcher Cyornis tickelliae R 300-900 C118 White-rumped Shama Copsycus malabaricus R 700-900 C119 Pied Bushchat Saxicola caprata R 300-900 C120 Indian Robin Saxicoloides fulicata R 300-640 C121 Blue-headed Rock-Thrush Monticola cinclorhynchus M 680 R122 Indian Blue Robin Luscinia brunnea R 300-900 C123 Oriental Magpie-Robin Copsycus saularis R 300-900 CNectariniidae124 Purple-rumped Sunbird Nectarinia zeylonica R 300-900 C125 Small Sunbird Nectarinia minima R,E 900 R126 Loten's Sunbird Nectarinia lotenia R 500-900 UC127 Purple Sunbird Nectarinia asiatica R 300-900 C128 Little Spiderhunter Arachnothera longirostra R 650-900 ROriolidae129 Eurasian Golden Oriole Oriolus oriolus M 300-350 C130 Black-naped Oriole Oriolus chinensis M 640-900 C131 Black-headed Oriole Oriolus xanthornus R 370-900 CParidae132 Great Tit Parus major R 600-900 C133 Black-lored Yellow Tit Parus xanthogenys R 700-900 UCParoidea134 Grey-headed Flycatcher Culicicapa ceylonensis R 800-900 UCPasseridae135 House Sparrow Passer domesticus R 300-900 CPhalacrocoracidae136 Little Cormorant Phalacrocorax niger R 300-900 CJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–32833275

Birds of lower Palni HillsT. Ramesh et al.Family/Species common name Scientific name StatusAltitude(in m)Frequencyof observation137 Darter Anhinga melanogaster R,NT 300-900 CPhasianidae138 Grey FrancolinFrancolinuspondicerianusR 300- 400 C139 Rain Quail Coturnix coromandelica R 300-900 C140 Painted Bush-Quail Perdicula erythrorhyncha R 300-900 C141 Red Spurfowl Galloperdix spadicea R 500-900 C142 Painted Spurfowl Galloperdix lunulata R 320-650 C143 Grey Junglefowl Gallus sonneratii R 300-900 C144 Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus R 300-500 CPhylloscopidae145 Large-billed Leaf-WarblerPhylloscopusmagnirostrisM 500-900 UC146 Greenish Leaf-Warbler Phylloscopus trochiloides M 320-900 CPicidae147 Rufous Woodpecker Celeus brachyurus R 600-640 R148Little Scaly-bellied GreenWoodpeckerPicus xanthopygaeus R 350-900 UC149 Small Yellow-naped Woodpecker Picus chlorolophus R 665 C150151Lesser Golden-backedWoodpeckerCommon Golden-backedWoodpecker152 Yellow-fronted Pied Woodpecker153154Brown-capped PygmyWoodpeckerGreater Golden-backedWoodpeckerPittidaeDinopium benghalense R 300-900 CDinopium javanense R 300-900 CDendrocoposmahrattensisR 642-900 UCDendrocopos nanus R 780-900 UCChrysocolaptes lucidus R 700-900 C155 Indian Pitta Pitta brachyura M 300-900 CPloceidae156 Baya Weaver Ploceus philippinus R 300-350 CPodicipedidae157 Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis R 300-900 CPrionopidae158 Large Woodshrike Tephrodornis gularis R 550-900 C159 Common WoodshrikeTephrodornispondicerianusR 320-700 C160 Large Cuckoo-Shrike Coracina macei R 550-700 CPsittacidae161 Rose-ringed Parakeet Psittacula krameri R 300-450 C162 Plum-headed Parakeet Psittacula cyanocephala R 400-900 C163 Blue-winged Parakeet Psittacula colomboides R,E 500-900 C164 Indian Hanging-Parrot Loriculus vernalis R 500-900 CPycnonotidae165 Grey-headed Bulbul Pycnonotus priocephalus R,E 700-900 C166 Ruby-throated Yellow Bulbul*Pycnonotus melanicterusgularisR 700-900 UC167 Red-whiskered Bulbul Pycnonotus jocosus R 320-900 C3276Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–3283

Birds of lower Palni HillsT. Ramesh et al.Family/Species common name Scientific name StatusAltitude(in m)Frequencyof observation168 Red-vented Bulbul Pycnonotus cafer R 300-900 C169 Yellow-throated BulbulPycnonotusxantholaemusR,T 450-715 R170 White-browed Bulbul Pycnonotus luteolus R 300-700 C171 Yellow-browed Bulbul Iole indica R 700-900 UCRallidae172 White-breasted Waterhen Amaurornis phoenicurus R 300-900 CRhipiduridae173 White-browed Fantail-Flycatcher Rhipidura aureola R 640 CScolopacidae174 Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos M 300-900 CSittidae175 Velvet-fronted Nuthatch Sitta frontalis R 700-900 UCStrigidae176 Eurasian Eagle-Owl Bubo bubo R 350 R177 Spotted Owlet Athene brama R 300-900 CSturnidae178 Rosy Starling Sturnus roseus M 320-400 UC179 Common Myna Acridotheres tristis R 300-500 C180 Jungle Myna Acridotheres fuscus R 450-900 UC181 Southern Hill-Myna Gracula indica R 750-900 CSylviidae182 Yellow-eyed Babbler Chrysomma sinense R 300-500 CTimaliidae183 Indian Scimitar-Babbler Pomatorhinus horsfieldii R 500-900 C184 Rufous-bellied Babbler Dumetia hyperythra R 300-900 C185 Black-headed Babbler Rhopocichla atriceps R 700-900 UC186 Common Babbler Turdoides caudatus R 320-400 C187 Indian Rufous Babbler Turdoides subrufus R,E 540-900 R188 Jungle Babbler Turdoides striatus R 450-900 C189 White-headed Babbler Turdoides affinis R 300-400 C190 Quaker Tit-Babbler Alcippe poioicephala R 450-900 RTrogonidae191 Malabar Trogon Harpactes fasciatus R 740-900 CTurdidae192 Malabar Whistiling-Thrush Myiophonus horsfieldii R 500-900 CTurnicidae193 Common Buttonquail Turnix suscitator R 300-320 C194 Small Buttonquail Turnix sylvatica R 320 CUpupidae195 Common Hoopoe Upupa epops R 300-900 CZosteropidae196 Oriental White-eye Zosterops palpebrosus R 550-900 CR - Resident; C - Common; T- Threatened; M - Migrant; UC - Uncommon; NT - Near Threatened; AM - Altitudinal Migrant; X - Rare; E - EndemicJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–32833277

Birds of lower Palni Hillsadditional eggs on 8 March. On 25 March the hatchedeggshells were seen under the tree but the hatchlingswere taken away by graziers for consumption. Thenest was noticed again with a single egg on 5 April2005, which was predated later. The other nest waslocated in early March on Acacia catechu near thearboretum of PHCC. It had two eggs and both fledgedsuccessfully on 2 nd May 2005.Changeable Hawk-eagle Spizaetus cirrhatus:During the transect count on 24 March 2005 a nestwas located containing a newly hatched chick withfluffy white down feathers and black beak on a treelocated in a ravine of the riparian forest at an altitude of732m. The nestling, being a singleton, was monitoredcontinuously until fully grown and fledged. The nestwas a large platform of sticks and twigs with a centraldepression lined with fresh green leaves constantlyrenovated to protect the nestling from direct sunlight.The nest was located at a height of about 15m fromthe ground on a 30m tall tree having a dbh (diameterat breast height) of 132cm.Painted Spurfowl Galloperdix lunulata: A malewith a single chick with dark brown down featherswas seen foraging on a rocky slope interspersed withgrass and bush, near the road at 410m altitude on 14June 2005. It was speculated that both parents wereinvolved in parental care.Grey Junglefowl Gallus sonneratii: Noticed withthree chicks on 25 March 2005, at 781m altitude.Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus: Three juvenileswere recorded on 11 December 2004 at 350m altitudeand may have possibly hatched in early November.Little Brown Dove Streptopelia senegalensis:Three nests were observed in the Lower Palnis. At320m altitude the nest was made up of short grasseslaid on the ground under Dodonaea viscosa bush.Another nest was located on an Acacia planifrons treeon 07 April 2005. A pair of eggshells from anothernest was collected near Carissa sp. shrub on 14 June2005.Spotted Dove Streptopelia chinensis: On 2 July2005, a nest with two eggs was located on the lowerfork of a Teak Tectona grandis tree at about 3m fromthe ground at 320m altitude.Plum-headed Parakeet Psittacula cyanocephala:Two juveniles with an adult were seen at 600m altitudeon 7 April 2005.Sirkeer Malkoha Phaenicophaeus leschenaultii:T. Ramesh et al.A juvenile was seen perched on a Diospyros montanatree at 350m altitude in mid April and another juvenileaccompanying an adult was noticed in early June2005.Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis: This specieswas seen carrying food material in mid June at 320maltitude.Spotted Owlet Athene brama: The nest was seenon a rooftop of a house at 300m altitude. Two broodswere noticed in the same nest, one during February andanother in late April. Both the broods were observedwith eggs, but on the next day, all eggs rolled out ofthe nest to the ground.Common Indian Nightjar Caprimulgus asiaticus:Two juveniles accompanying an adult were seen alongthe mud path at 320m altitude on 5 May 2005. Ajuvenile was caught in a mist net in early December.White-breasted Kingfisher Halcyon smyrnensis: Anest was located on the roadside bank at 630m altitude,during May 2005.Blue-bearded Bee-eater Nyctyornis athertoni: On29 April 2005, a nest was located along the roadsidealong a gentle downward slope at a height of 850maltitude. The nest was about 3–4 cm in diameter andmore than 1.5m deep.Small Bee-eater Merops orientalis: On 24 April2005, at 320m altitude a nest was observed in a smallearthen structure constructed for rainwater harvesting.The nest hole was about two inches in diameter andboth adults were seen hunting insects and feeding theirnestlings. Many insect heads were seen scattered atthe entrance of the nest.Chestnut-headed Bee-eater Merops leschenaulti:In Lower Palnis, more than five nests were seenon a roadside sand bank on 17 April 2005 at 650maltitude. These nests were horizontal tunnels drilledinto the sand bank. An active nest was located and twoeggshells were seen near the nest hole.Malabar Grey Hornbill Ocyceros griseus: Twonests were noticed during March 2005 at an altitudeof c. 800m. A nest-hole was found on a horizontalbranch of a large Buchanania axillaris tree at a heightof about 20m from the ground and the other was on thetrunk of a large tree with 10 nesting holes. In both thenests, the adult male was seen feeding the incarceratedinmates with black berries and insects. On 23 June2005, two fledglings flew across the road.Red-rumped Swallow Hirundo daurica: In the3278Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–3283

Birds of lower Palni Hillslower Palnis, three nests were located. Of them, twowere constructed under road culverts, one at 415maltitude and the other at 552m altitude. The third nestwas seen on the ceiling of an abandoned building at320m with shells of two eggs found on the ground.Only a single nest was seen with two nestlings.Large cuckoo-shrike Coracina macei: A nest wasnoticed in the lower Palnis during early May 2005at 604m altitude. The nest was seen on the fork of aTectona grandis tree at a height of about 20m. The nestwas built by peeling the fibres from a Commiphoracaudata tree. The nest was not found after the rains.Small Minivet Pericrocotus cinnamomeus:Although the nest was not seen, both male and femalewere seen carrying food in mid April 2005 in the scrubforests at 320m altitude.Scarlet Minivet Pericrocotus flammeus: On 24March 2005, a well-camouflaged nest lined with lichenwas observed on Tectona grandis and the female wasseen incubating the eggs. The male fed the incubatingfemale a moth.Black-crested Bulbul Pycnonotus melanicterusgularis: On 20 January 2005, a nest was located at789m altitude. The bird was seen plucking leaves fornest construction and taking them onto a tree.Red-whiskered Bulbul Pycnonotus jocosus:Although no nests were located, two juveniles werecaught in a mist net, at an altitude of 320m on 1 stNovember 2004. As this species is very rare in thelower altitudes (up to 400m), the juveniles caughtmight be undergoing a ‘juvenile dispersal period’.Yellow-throated Bulbul Pycnonotus xantholaemus:Collection of nest materials by this bird was noticedon 10 April 2005 and 9 June 2005.White-browed Bulbul Pycnonotus luteolus: A nestwas located on 18 April 2005 on Celtis sp. tree at about4m from the ground at 630m altitude.Oriental Magpie-robin Copsychus saularis: On 7May 2005, a bird was observed in the thick undergrowthwith an insect in its mouth at 591m altitude.White-rumped Shama Copsychus malabaricus: Anest was located on a short dead stump of a tree onan inaccessible slope at 410m altitude. Both the birdswere seen frequenting the site as if they were feedingyoung ones.Indian Robin Saxicoloides fulicata: The bird wasseen carrying food to an inaccessible bush. Suchsightings were made at various altitudes from 320–600T. Ramesh et al.m altitude from mid May till late June.Rufous-bellied Babbler Dumetia hyperythra: Anest with four nestlings was located at about 350m on30 April 2005 and all the nestlings fledged on 2 May2005.Yellow-eyed Babbler Chrysomma sinense: Anest with two nestlings was located on 17 November2004.White-headed Babbler Turdoides affinis: A nestwith three eggs was located on a fork of Carissa sp.bush at about 1.5m from the ground on 19 February2005 at 320m altitude. The eggs were predated andthe nest was abandoned.Jungle Prinia Prinia sylvatica: Three nests werelocated in the scrub jungle between altitudes 300 and400 m from late February to May. Out of the threenests, two had nestlings (two and three) and the othernests with three eggs were abandoned later. Thebreeding season does not correspond with the months(April to September) as indicated by Ali & Ripley(1983).Plain Prinia Prinia inornata: A nest with twonestlings was located during the first week ofDecember 2004 at 320m altitude. Both the chicksfledged successfully.Common Tailorbird Orthotomus sutorius: A totalof 23 juveniles were ringed from September to June at320m altitude.Asian Brown Flycatcher Muscicapa dauurica: Ajuvenile was noticed in a mixed foraging flock at 665maltitude on 7 June 2005. An adult was noticed feedinga juvenile at 640m altitude on 17 June 2005.Tickell’s Blue-flycatcher Cyornis tickelliae: Inthe Lower Palnis, two nests with nestlings each, werelocated between 564 and 648 m altitudes respectively.Both the nests were placed in rocky clefts along theroadside. The first nest was located in late April 2005which was well camouflaged with fern leaves andplaced at about 5m from the ground and the next waslocated in late June at about 4m from the ground.Tickell’s Flowerpecker Dicaeum erythrorynchos:A male and female were observed collecting nestmaterials on 22 and 29 January 2005 at 550m altitudein the dry deciduous forests of Lower Palni Hills.Thick-billed Flowerpecker Dicaeum agile: Twonests were observed. A nest with two nestlings wasbeing fed by both adults on an Acacia planifrons treeat c.3m from the ground on 29 January 2005 at 420mJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–32833279

Birds of lower Palni Hillsaltitude. The other was located on an Albizzia lebbecktree at c.5m from the ground on 12 February 2005 at580m altitude.Purple-rumped Sunbird Nectarinia zeylonica: Fournests were recorded, one each in January and Februaryand two in March. All nests were abandoned.Purple Sunbird Nectarinia asiatica: Ten nests wereseen with two eggs each in lower Palnis. Nestlingsin four nests fledged successfully, two nests wereabandoned and the other two nests could not bemonitored. A nest was located with two eggs on 28April at 320m altitude in Acacia leucophloea tree,but both the hatchlings succumbed to rain on 3 May2005.Loten’s Sunbird Nectarinia lotenia: At 462maltitude a nest was located on 11 April 2005 at c. 6mfrom the ground on a tree. Both the adults were seenfrequenting the nest.Oriental White-eye Zosterops palpebrosus: Inlower Palnis, construction of two nests was observedon 24 March at altitudes 738 and 744 m. One was atabout 3m from the ground on a Celtis sp. tree but waslater damaged by a vehicle passing over. The other wasat a height of about 8m from the ground on a tree.White-rumped Munia Lonchura striata: Two nestswere recorded on 2 December 2004. One was locatedwith seven nestlings on a tree about 3m from theground. One had an egg but no eggs were found in theother. Both the nests were abandoned.White-throated Munia Lonchura malabarica:A nest with three eggs was located on an Acaciaplanifrons tree in late November 2005.Common Myna Acridotheres tristis: A nest wasconstructed on the roof of a building at 320m altitudeduring mid June and the the incubating eggs were seentill early July 2005.Southern Hill-myna Gracula religiosa indica: Anest was observed at 800m altitude in Lower Palnison Chukrasia tubularis tree at c. 5m from the groundduring late March 2005. Reuse of the nest by the pairwas observed in March and the second brood was seenin July 2005.Black-headed Oriole Oriolus xanthornus:Collection of nest material was seen in late April and ajuvenile was observed being fed by its parents in midJune 2005 at 619m altitude.Black Drongo Dicrurus macrocercus: On 24 March2005, a nest with two eggs was located on AcaciaT. Ramesh et al.leucophloea tree and both the eggs hatched on 5 April2005.Greater Racket-tailed Drongo Dicrurus paradiseus:In the lower Palnis, a nest with an incubating femalewas seen during mid April at 762m altitude on a talltree c. 20m from the ground.Indian Treepie Dendrocitta vagabunda: A matingpair was sighted in mid June 2005 at 360m altitude.A juvenile was seen begging for food from an adult at630m altitude on 6 July 2005.Jungle Crow Corvus macrorhynchos: A nest waslocated during mid-June on Azadirachta indica tree ata height of 7m from the ground.DiscussionSpecies richness generally decreases with increasingelevation (Begon et al. 1996). Bird distribution andabundance varies with habitat (Jayapal et al. 2007;Ramesh et al. 2011), climatic condition, food resourceand evolutionary history of the area (Jayson 1994).The species richness recorded was lowest in the upperPalnis (n=99) and mid Palnis (n=130) (Balachandranet al. 2005) in comparison to lower Palnis. This wasprobably because lower Palnis has more deciduousand scrub jungle which may support high foodavailability. Thus, in this heterogeneous matrix ofhabitat it is essential to maintain and conserve intactforests. In Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve,Raman et al. (2005) revealed that bird communitycomposition significantly correlated with elevationand tree species composition of sites, indicating theinfluence of deterministic factors on bird communitystructure. Resource abundance and availability aredescribed as the most important factor in determiningthe community structure (Recher & Davis 2002). Thebird families Accipitridae, Cuculidae, Muscicapidae,Picidae, Timaliidae, Phasianidae, Pycnonotidae,Ardeidae, Cisticolidae, Columbidae, Dicruridae,Estrildidae, Motacillidae and Nectariniidae aresufficiently abundant and thus considered to becharacteristic of resource availability in this region(Balachandran et al. 2005). Endemic bird specieswere less in the lower Palnis than mid and upperPalnis. Most of the endemics were confined to thehigher altitudes due to the presence of moist evergreenand high altitude montane forests and grasslands3280Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–3283

Birds of lower Palni Hills(Pramod et al. 1997; Vijayan & Gokula 2006). Theextensive deciduous and scrub forests were notused much by the endemics though the habitats aregenerally richer in bird species than humid evergreenand montane forests, when equal areas are compared(Daniels et al. 1991, 1992). Similarly, the commonand resident birds are abundant in lower Palnis. Morebird species and families were found between 600and 900 m altitude. This is probably related to thepresence of mixed vegetation types at these altitudes.By comparing the number of species present in lowerPalnis with earlier studies by Balachandran et al.(2005), and Somasundaram & Vijayan (2008) in midand upper Palnis the species richness was higher in thelower altitude than the higher altitude. Similarly, moststudies have shown a general pattern of decreasingspecies richness with increasing altitude believedto mirror the well-recognised latitudinal gradient inspecies richness (MacArthur 1972; Bachman et al.2004, Raman et al. 2005).Palni Hills is located in the southeastern WesternGhats and is well known for its high endemism(Rajmohana & Radhakrishnan 2008). Though thesehills are highly significant for the seven high altitudeendemic species namely Nilgiri Wood-Pigeon,Grey-breasted Laughing Thrush, Black-and-OrangeFlycatcher, Nilgiri Flycatcher, Broad-tailed Grass-Warbler, White-bellied Shortwing and Nilgiri Pipit,they are found above 1500m (Balachandran et al.2005; Somasundaram & Vijayan 2008) despite thelower Palnis having a threatened species, three nearlythreatened and five endemic species. In total, 9 and11 endemics, 3 and 2 Vulnerable and 5 and 4 NearThreatened birds were recorded in mid and upperPalnis, respectively. The Indian Rufous BabblerTurdoides subrufus and the Small Sunbird Nectariniaminima are the two endemics seen in all the threedivisions of Palnis. It is evident that Palni hills isa significant site due to the high congregation ofthreatened and endemic bird species as referred by theImportant Bird Area (IBA) (Islam & Rahmani 2004).This site has been selected as an IBA site on the basisof the presence of globally threatened species witha significant percentage of restricted range species,and some biome-restricted species (Islam & Rahmani2004). The presence of endemic and threatenedspecies indicates the conservation importance of thestudy site. All the endemic species observed haveT. Ramesh et al.already been recorded in the hill ranges of PalniHills (Fairbank 1877; Terry 1887; Nichols 1937)while some that appeared to be rare like the IndianRufous Babbler, Blue-winged Parakeet Psittaculacolumboides and Malabar Grey Hornbill Ocycerosgriseus in Lower Palnis may be due to habitatfragmentation and degradation. Habitat loss due toanthropogenic pressure is the greatest threat to mostof the Indian birds (Rahmani 2008). Anthropogenicpressures like illegal encroachment into forest land,livestock-grazing, and harvesting of fuel wood withhuge quantities of minor forest products must beput under control in this region (Balachandran et al.2005). Interestingly, variations in the observation ofbreeding season compared to Ali & Ripley (1983)was noticed in plain Prinia Prinia inornata, known tobreed from March to July, was found breeding in thefirst week of December. Its nest was located with twonestlings. Both nestlings fledged successfully. ShikraAccipiter badius breeds from March to June but italso bred earlier in February. Spotted Owlet Athenebrama breeds in November and March but the secondbrood was observed in April. Common Iora Aegithinatiphia usually breeds from January to August, but itwas noticed breeding in November along with theobservation of a nest with juveniles. Baya WeaverPloceus philippinus usually breeds from June toSeptember but it was seen breeding in October.Our study illustrated useful breeding observationsof birds in the Palni Hills. The protection of ImportantBird Areas contributes not only to bird conservationbut even the biodiversity of this highly endangeredecosystem as a whole (Islam & Rahmani 2004). Sincewe documented the occurrence, altitudinal distributionand breeding observations, we felt that eight monthswere sufficient to bring out useful information on theaforementioned aspects. However, we agree that theshort term field study was a limitation and definitely along term study would bring out robust ornithologicalinformation on Palni Hills. This study generatedbaseline data on bird species occurrence along analtitudinal gradient in the lower Palni Hills. Largescale habitat changes occurring globally fulfil endlesshuman needs, habitat destruction, fragmentation anddegradation necessitates further assessment on theimpact of anthropogenic changes on birds (Brash 1987;Whitten et al. 1987; Khan et al. 1993). To maintain thebird community structure, further habitat exploitationJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–32833281

Birds of lower Palni HillsPramod, P., N.V. Joshi, U. Ghate & M. Gadgil (1997). On the hospitality of WesternGhats habitats for bird communities. Current Science 73(2): 122–127.Prater, S.H. (1971). The Book of Indian Animals. Bombay Natural History Society,Oxford University Press, Bombay.Rajmohana, K. & C. Radhakrishnan (2008). Western Ghats- A Hotspot ofBiological Wealth. Technical Report, Western Ghats Field Research Station,Zoological Survey of India, Kozhikode, Kerala, 32pp.Rahmani, A.R. (2008). Flight to extinction. Spectrum, The Tribune. Retrieved June 8,2008, from http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080608/spectrum/Main1.htm.Raman, T.R.S., N.V. Joshi & R. Sukumar (2005). Tropical rainforest bird communitystructure in relation to altitude, tree species composition, and null models in theWestern Ghats, India. Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science,34pp.Ramesh, T., N. Sridharan & R. Kalle (2011). Birds of Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary,Central India. Zoo’s Print 26(12): 25–29.Recher, H.F. & W.E. Davis (2002). Foraging profile of a Salmon Gum woodlandavifauna in Western Australia. Journal of Royal Society of Western Australia 85:103–111.Robin, V.V. & R. Sukumar (2002). Status and habitat preference of White-belliedShortwing Brachypteryx major in the Western Ghats (Kerala and Tamil Nadu),India. Bird Conservation International 12: 335–351.Shahabuddin, G. (1997). Preliminary observations on the role of coffee plantationsas avifaunal refuges in the Palni Hills of the Western Ghats. Journal of the BombayNatural History Society 94(1): 10–21.Shafiq, T., S. Javed & J.A. Khan (1997). Bird community structure of middle altitudeoak forest in Kumaon Himalayas, India: a preliminary investigation. InternationalJournal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 23: 389–400.Somasundaram, S. & L. Vijayan (2008). Foraging behaviour and guildstructure of birds in the montane wet temperate forest of the Palni Hills, southIndia. Podoces 3(1/2): 79–91.Steele, A. (1990). Birds of Petuparai, Kodaikanal. Newsletter for Birdwatchers 30(7–8): 9.Surendran, K.K. (1973). The crow in Kodaikanal, Palni Hills. India. Newsletter forBirdwatchers 13(8): 10.Terry, H.A. (1887). A few additional notes on birds of the Pulney Hills. Stray Feathers10: 467–480.Vijayan L. & V. Gokula (2006). Human Impact on the Bird Communities in theWestern Ghats. In: Proceeding of the Chinese Acad. Sciences. Proceeding of the23 rd International Ornithological Congress, Beijing 2002. Symposium paper. ActaZoologica Sinica 52: 692–696.T. Ramesh et al.Author Details: Dr. Th a r m a l i n g a m Ra m e s h isbroadly interested in mammal and bird ecology.He has conducted research on migratory birds,water birds, mist-netting, bird-ringing andbirds of tropical forests in India. Presently heis a research fellow at the Wildlife Institute ofIndia, studying predator-prey ecology in theWestern Ghats. Mr. J.P.P. Ch a k r a v a r t h y is a Sr.Project Officer in the Western Ghats LandscapeProgram at WWF, studying the populationof tiger, since 2010. Dr. S. Ba l a c h a n d r a n isa Sr. Scientist at BNHS, studying migratorywater birds and their movements acrossIndia. Ms. Rid d h i k a Kalle is pursuing her PhDat the Wildlife Institute of India (WII), on smallcarnivore ecology in Mudumalai Tiger Reserve.She worked as a research fellow at WII onpredator-prey ecology in the Western Ghats.Author Contribution: TR wrote the manuscript,designed the study, conducted field surveys,collected and analysed the data, JPPC and SB,designed the study, conducted field surveysand collected data, RK helped with the writingand editing of the manuscript.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3269–32833283

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3284–3293Elephant Elephas maximus Linnaeus (Proboscidea:Elephantidae) migration paths in the Nilgiri Hills, Indiain the late 1970sE.R.C. Davidar 1 , Peter Davidar 2 , Priya Davidar 3 & Jean-Philippe Puyravaud 41Deceased.2,4ECOS, 9A Frédéric Ozanam St., Colas Nagar, Puducherry 605001, India3Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Pondicherry University, Kalapet, Puducherry 605014, IndiaEmail: 2 sigurnaturetrust@gmail.com, 3 pdavidar.ees@pondiuni.edu.in, 4 jp.puyravaud@gmail.com (corresponding author)Date of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: Heidi RiddleManuscript details:Ms # o3008Received 15 November 2011Final received 31 August 2012Finally accepted 15 October 2012Citation: Davidar, E.R.C., P. Davidar, P. Davidar& J.-P. Puyravaud (2012). Elephant Elephasmaximus Linnaeus (Proboscidea: Elephantidae)migration paths in the Nilgiri Hills, India in thelate 1970s. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14):3284–3293.Copyright: © E.R.C. Davidar, Peter Davidar,Priya Davidar & Jean-Philippe Puyravaud 2012.Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 UnportedLicense. JoTT allows unrestricted use of thisarticle in any medium for non-profit purposes,reproduction and distribution by providingadequate credit to the authors and the sourceof publication.Author Details, Author Contribution andAcknowledgements: see end of this article.Abstract: The study presented was carried out in 1978 with the support of the AsianElephant Specialist Group (AsESG) of the International Union for the Conservation ofNature (IUCN) Species Survival Commission (SSC). Its objective was to investigate theimpediments to elephant movement in the Nilgiri Hills, in the Western Ghats of India,in an attempt to suggest positive steps to encourage movement through the provisionof corridors. The report was left unpublished, but given its importance as a referencedocument for the conservation of the Asian elephant in the Nilgiris, in 2011 the last twoauthors decided to publish it. The process of habitat fragmentation has been going onever since man started agriculture. But this problem has, of late, become much moreacute due to mounting pressure on land. The corridor concept applied to wildlife isthe provision of a free and, as far as possible, unimpeded way for the passage of wildanimals between two wildlife zones. A corridor’s more important function is to preventwild animals from getting isolated in small pocket-like islands. Maintaining elephanthabitat connectivity in and around the Nilgiris rests upon the understanding that elephantpopulations of the several protected areas of the now Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve mustremain active. The first author surveyed the Nilgiris on foot and on elephant back forseveral months in 1978. It was concluded that four areas (the Nilgiri north slopes andDeccan Plateau, the south and southeastern slopes, the Gudalur Plateau, and the upperplateau) harboured together 10 corridors that needed to be maintained, or restored, oreven partially restored.Keywords: Asian Elephant, connectivity, conservation, corridors, Elephas maximusLinnaeus, habitat, Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve.Prefaceurn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:8DBD3959-3024-43AE-938E-EA234D2852B0OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADThe work presented here was undertaken by the late E.R.C. Davidarfor the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) AsianElephant Specialist Group (AsESG) in the second half of the 1970s.The study was promoted by the late Mr. J.C. Daniel, former Chairman,IUCN AsESG, and former Vice-President of the Bombay Natural HistorySociety (BNHS).Forty years ago, naturalists started to be concerned about AsianElephant Elephas maximus migrations. Nothing much was known aboutit but biologists could see that development in the Nilgiri Mountains(Western Ghats of India) posed more and more obstacles to the freemovement of elephants. Geographic information systems (GISs) were intheir infancy, the Landsat satellite program had just started, and personalcomputers were rare. In order to visualize how elephants migrated, therewas no other way than to go to the field, observe and produce maps, aswere doing land surveyors.Only few people were interested in spending months in jungles3284Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–3293

Elephant migration in the late 1970s“infested” (the term used at that time) by dangerouswildlife. E.R.C. Davidar was one of them and hadalready done extensive field surveys all over theWestern Ghats and the Nilgiris (e.g. Davidar 1978).With 25 years of experience in this rough terrain, hewalked or visited on elephant back all habitats hethought were of importance.E.R.C. Davidar finalized the first version of histext “Investigation of elephant migration paths in theNilgiri Hills and inquiry into impediments to the freemovement of elephants and recommendations for theprovision of corridors for their movement” in 1981,and submitted it to Mr. J.C. Daniel for comments. Thestudy remained a poorly circulated, unpublished draft.After seeking permission from the IUCN AsESG andthe BNHS in 2011, the two last authors decided topublish the report.Why should we publish an old report as wildlifescience in India has considerably evolved since theseventies? There were several reasons. Firstly, it wasthe first study of elephant corridors in India. Due tothe amazing field experience of the lead author E.R.C.Davidar, a life-time of treks and interaction withshikaris (guides of hunting parties) who had an intimateknowledge of the jungle, he came to draw generalpatterns of elephant migrations in the Nilgiris. Thereport is consequently a historical record of elephantmovements, and an invaluable baseline scenario forany study on corridors for this region. Secondly, it isreferred to in technical surveys (Menon et al. 2005),Forest Department master documents (Tamil NaduForest Department, 2009), newspapers 1 , scientificarticles (i.e. Johnsingh & Williams 1999), and books(i.e. Santiapillai & Jackson 1990), but available to onlya handful of specialists. Thirdly and most importantly,E.R.C. Davidar understood that his mission ofrecording corridors was “a purely negative exercise”,and extended the scope of the study. His reasoningwas that focusing on functional elephants corridorswas biased since it would not take into considerationcorridors that were recently lost at the time of thestudy, which has implications for conservation. Theselost corridors needed to be restored to reduce conflictwith elephants and to properly manage elephantpopulations. Following this rationale, he recorded1http://www.tehelka.com/story_main49.asp?filename=Ne3000411Corridor.aspE.R.C. Davidar et al.functional corridors and also added what he knew tobe recently lost major elephant corridors.Corridors, in his view, were meant to maintainconnectivity among core habitats and were necessary(i) outside protected areas, or (ii) within a potentiallythreatened protected area. To him, it was obvious thatparticular former passages had to be restored becausethey were, and still are, potential areas for human /elephant conflict. If restoration was impossible, it wasstill of value to note the place of a former corridor,because future generations might be more sensitive tothe fate of the elephants than ours.The reader must be warned that the manuscriptand study styles are very much at variance withpresent-day scientific articles. Moreover, the contentof the original draft report has been shortened. Thetext has been edited only when minor changesregarding the expression were absolutely necessary.Recommendations are unchanged. Location nameshave been retained as per the draft. For example,“Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary” was kept insteadof “Mudumalai Tiger Reserve”, as it is called today.No actualized literature has been added except in thepreface. Wherever text has been added in 2011, it is inbetween brackets [ ].Investigating elephant paths in theNilgirisThe Nilgiri Hills, located between 11 0 10’–11 0 30’N& 76 0 25’–77 0 00’E, are an off-shoot of the WesternGhats where the Eastern Ghats terminate. Thegeographical area of the Nilgiri District is 2,452km 2 ,and the area covered by this report including forestsin Kerala and the Coimbatore District in Tamil Nadu,is 3,000km 2 approximately (Image 1). This regionencompasses several forest types, which are mostlytropical wet evergreen, tropical semievergreen,tropical moistdeciduous, and montane wet temperatetypes of forests (Champion & Seth 1968). Thisregion is served by both the south-west and northeastmonsoons, but there is considerable variabilityin rainfall and temperature in the different areas sinceelevation ranges between 200 and 2,600 m.Elephants are great wanderers. In Africa, elephantsLoxodonta africana have been known to cover greatdistances, and their wanderings have been recordedJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–32933285

Elephant migration in the late 1970sE.R.C. Davidar et al.Image 1. Study area with the 10 reported corridors (see text for details) and the four regions in which ecosystemconnectivity was severed or under threat: (I) the northern slopes and the southern portion of the Deccan Plateau, (II) thesouth and south-eastern slopes, (III) the Gudalur plateau, and (IV) the upper plateauwith meticulous care by researchers. There arefew such records for the Asian elephants, althoughmigrations, though not on a similar scale as in Africa,do occur. In the Nilgiris, unlike in most places, thereis scope for both lateral as well as vertical movement.There also appears to be definite migratory seasons,although solitary bulls as well as bull parties are on themove year round.These migrations are likely to offer elephants achange of diet and climate. For instance, elephantsmove from wetter tracts such as tropical wet evergreenand tropical semievergreen forests in the west, totropical moistdeciduous and dry deciduous scrub inthe east. That way, they may escape insects that swarmthe wet regions during the south-west monsoon. Italso gives sections of the habitat a chance to recover.Wild elephants had their traditional migration pathsparticularly over difficult hill country. It is believedthat engineers opening up the hills to traffic followedsome of these trek routes to lay roads as they foundthat the elephants had done their gradient survey forthem! Elephant depredations and damage to crops areless concentrated due to such movement. Encouragingmovement of wildlife is a necessary tool in wildlifemanagement.As the Nilgiri Hills developed, the migration pathsbegan to shift. In the course of time many had to beabandoned due to being cut up by roads, settlements,cultivation, plantations, hydroelectric projects, andso on. Most have ceased to exist. On level groundhowever, elephants had no set routes, except at riverfords and like. In the Nilgiris, short stretches of wellbeatenelephant trails still exist, especially on theslopes.The present project started as an ”Investigationof the migration routes of elephants in the Nilgiris”.As the investigation proceeded, it became apparentthat it would be a purely negative exercise [as withdevelopment, some of these routes had already beensevered]. It was, therefore, decided to enlarge the3286Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–3293

Elephant migration in the late 1970sscope of the project. In addition, we investigatedthe impediments to elephant movement in the area tosuggest positive steps to encourage movement throughthe provision of corridors.The corridor concept applied to wildlife is theprovision of a free and, as far as possible, unimpededway for the passage of wild animals between twowildlife zones. A corridor’s more important functionis to prevent wild animals from getting isolated insmall pocket-like islands. The process of habitatfragmentation has been going on ever since manstarted agriculture. But this problem has, of late,become much more acute due to mounting pressureon land.What should be the optimum size of a corridor?The length will naturally depend on the distance tobe connected. In doing so, it may become necessaryto take a circuitous route connecting existing jungles.There cannot be any hard and fast rule on the width.It may be anything from approximately 100m toapproximately 2km. The wider the better. Butlimitations such as the lay of the land, the types ofcountry, and practical consideration such as causingleast disturbance to people who are likely to beaffected by the provisions of corridors has to be takeninto account in determining the width.MethodsWildlife literature relating to the Nilgiris wasexhaustively researched for information [in 1978] onelephants’ migration and to identify migration paths.Unfortunately references on the subject were sketchy[at the time of this report]. All known elephant habitatswere extensively covered on foot following migrationpaths whenever possible.Four areas seemed of particular importance, so wedivided the Nilgiris into four broad sections: (I) thenorthern slopes and the southern portion of the DeccanPlateau (called “Deccan Plateau” hereafter), (II) thesouth and southeastern slopes, (III) the Gudalur plateau,and (IV) the upper plateau. [All corridors noted 1 to 10in the four different areas were represented in Image1. In the original report, corridors were marked onphotocopied survey of India topographic maps. Thesedocuments would have been adequate forty years agowhen forest officers knew the area well. These originalE.R.C. Davidar et al.maps were used to produce more readable documents.Reserved forest layers have been redrawn on the basisof Prabhakar & Pascal (1996) with GRASS-GIS (2011)and QGIS (2011). The reserved forests approximatelyrepresent the elephant habitat. Most of the reservedforests could be represented fairly accurately exceptthe northern Attappadi Reserved Forest, which wasimproperly delimited.]ResultsI. Nilgiri north slopes and Deccan PlateauThis region is defined as the section of the DeccanPlateau north of, and below the main Nilgiri Plateautowards the east of the Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary(Image 2). Reserved forests of the Sigur range occupymost of the land area. Interspersed among these reservedforests are the populous village of Masinagudi, somehamlets, tribal settlements, Electricity Board camps,and cattle pens besides cultivated ‘patta’ lands. Thereare also some revenue forests and revenue landsbelonging to the State Government and private forests.Some of these non-reserved forests serve as linksbetween reserved forests.This region, the slopes of the main Nilgiri range aswell as the slopes leading down to the Moyar River inthe north, supports a fair elephant population. The mostimportant function of this area is that it serves as themigration route between Mudumalai and the Wyanadforests on the west, and the Talamalai/Hasanur Plateauand Biligirirangan ranges on the east and northeast.Obstructions to free movement of elephants occurin the shape of penstocks (huge cylindrical pipes) andtrolley lines leading to the Singara and Moyar powerhouses and the flume channel connecting the two, and‘patta’ lands. In spite of these obstructions elephantstrek from one section to the other using interspersedprivate forests and revenue forests. It is essential thatthese non-reserved forests should be preserved tofacilitate elephants and other animals to trek from onesection to the other avoiding long detours.1. The Mudumalai-Singara-Sigur connectionGlenmorgan, on the edge of the upper Nilgiri slope,is where the head works of the Singara power house islocated. Along the entire width of this 1,000m slope, atthe foot of which the Singara power house is installed,Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–32933287

Elephant migration in the late 1970sE.R.C. Davidar et al.Image 2. Map of the reserved forests of the study area according to Prabhakar & Pascal (1996)the movement of elephants is blocked by three rows ofpenstocks, the trolley, and communication lines thatrun parallel to them. Animals on the slopes that wantto cross over have to make a long detour by comingright down to the power house level at Singara, andskirt the Electricity Board camp before doing so. Thenthey meet the Singara-Masinagudi road connecting thetwo places. Elephants coming from the southern partof the Mudumalai Sanctuary also use this stretch tomigrate to the Sigur range and the slopes.On either side of the middle stretch of theMasinagudi-Singara road is a private forest. Thisforms part of the Singara estate. It is reported thatthis forest is under litigation [at the time of the study]and whether the land remains with the present owneror not, a corridor is necessary here. Land for such acorridor is more easily set apart and the corridor set upbefore the process of development begins.It is recommended that a 600–800 m wide corridorconnecting Kalmalai Reserved Forest and SingaraReserved Forest across the Masinagudi-Singara roadbetween 3 and 4 km (from Masinagudi between thebridge over the channel and the Singara estate fencemarking the new planting) be set up.2. Mavinhalla Revenue ForestsOn either side of the Sigur River there are reservedforests. On the west is the Mudumalai Sanctuaryand Singara Reserved Forest, and on the east is SigurReserved Forest which connects the Talamalai plateauand the range of hills beyond. The reserved forestsare contiguous below Chemmanatham and the slopeabove the Sigur bridge. However for a distance of 6km both above and below Mavinhalla lands (cultivatedand fallow), cattle pens and the Mavinhalla hamletitself obstruct the passage of elephants, if a stretch ofrevenue forests south of Mavinhalla is not taken intoaccount. This stretch of revenue forests serves as acorridor between the reserved forests on either side.It is recommended that the revenue forestscomprising revenue survey nos. 98, 107, 109, 115, and246/1 of Masinagudi Village be converted to a reservedforest. Should it be considered very necessary, part ofthe survey fields on the northern end of the proposedcorridor (close to Mavinhalla and the highway) maybe excluded to be put to other uses.3288Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–3293

Elephant migration in the late 1970s3. Masinagudi-Thengamarada roadBetween Masinagudi and Sirur there is alreadya road which is about 20km long. Of this, 5km is aroad of the Highways Department, and the rest is ametalled road maintained by the Forest Department.There is a proposal to upgrade this road and connectit to Thengamarada and take it on from there toBhavanisagar and connect it to the Sathyamangalam-Mettupalayam highway. The road will soon become atwo lane highway. Branch roads are proposed to be laidto Hallimoyar and Kallampalayam. Work is already inprogress and in 2 years’ time the road is expected tobe ready for traffic. This is a prime wilderness arearich in wildlife which has remained undisturbed sofar. This road will traverse and cut across elephantmigration paths in several places.It is recommended that strict vigil be exercised toprevent exploitation to the detriment of wildlife.II. South and southeastern slopesOn the south and south-eastern slopes of the Nilgirihills, forests extend from Attapadi in Kerala to the westto Bhavanisagar in the east. Forests cover the base of themountain and extend into the plains, varying in depth.Forest cover on the Tamil Nadu side is continuous,except for the ghat roads (mountain roads), a railwayline, forest plantations, and the Kundah hydro-electricworks at the lower levels, tea and coffee plantations,and villages interspersed among the forests at thehigher elevations. Elephants are confined to the lowerlevels except for crop and jackfruit raiding foraysinto plantations higher up. The two main ghat roads,namely the Coonoor and Kotagiri ghat roads, the heavytraffic that they carry, the steep cuttings that have beenmade for laying roads, and the occupation of the landon either side of the road, are the main obstacles formovement of elephants.4. Kunjapanai CorridorsThe village of Kunjapanai on the Mettupalayam ghatroad is located about half way between Kotagiri andMettupalayam at an elevation of 1,200m. Elephants,mostly solitary or in small herds, frequent this areaparticularly during the jackfruit season. Elephantscome from the forest below, the plantations, and theforests east of the road. They cross the road above andbelow Kunjapanai. This does not happen frequently;when they do it is usually very late at night. BelowE.R.C. Davidar et al.Kunjapanai the steep slope and the road have madeit difficult for elephants to move from one side of theroad to the other.It is recommended that either side of Kunjapanai,particularly the road-side land, is kept free ofobstructions for the movement of elephants.5. Mettupalayam-Kotagiri ghat roadThe road is the second important link to the hillsfrom the south. It traverses a stretch of scrub junglewhich is part of the reserved forest in the plains. Onthe mountain slope steep road cuttings make it difficultfor the animals to cross. Therefore the bases of thehills and the forests in the plains have to be keptclear of obstruction. The scrub east of the road at thelower (Mettupalayam) end has been cleared, and anexperimental forest research station of the Tamil NaduAgricultural Institute has come up. It is fenced in andacts as a barrier to animals. There is an explosivesstore on the west. Other such obstructions might comeup along this road.It is recommended that a 1km stretch of thereserved forests on either side of the Mettupalayam-Kotagiri road between 4.2 and 5.2 km (distance fromMettupalayam) be left free of obstruction.6. Mettupalayam-Coonoor ghat road: the Kallar corridorThe Mettupalayam-Coonoor ghat road runs up theHullical Valley. The ghat road is the main highwayto the hills and starts its ascent at the 25 th km fromMettupalayam. On either side of the road from thebottom up to Burliar are reserved forests composedof scrub and mixed jungle. The jungle on the east ofthe road extends up to Bhavanisagar and beyond onthe west side up to Mulli on the Tamil Nadu-Keralaborder. No movement is possible at higher elevationbecause of road cuttings, revetments, steepness ofthe slopes, fruit orchards and plantations. Passage ispossible only at the start of the ascent. But at present,it is cut off because of the road itself, areca plantationsand fields, not to mention heavy traffic. But traffictapers off at night. In spite of these conditionselephants come as close as 100m to the road, and thereare reports of occasional elephant crossings at the 1 sthairpin bend (25 th km stone). The Coonoor River andthe Kallar River, which are only a short distance away,are frequently used by elephants. If access is to beprovided in the shape of a corridor, elephants and GaurJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–32933289

Elephant migration in the late 1970s(Bos gaurus) will make use of it.It is recommended that:a. A corridor about 100–150 m in width at andimmediately below the first hairpin bend be set up toconnect the reserved forests on either side.b. For this purpose private land needs to beacquired. Some land leased by the Government acrossthe Coonoor River may be resumed (such area to beacquired may not be more than 10 to12 hectares inextent).c. Plantations below the corridor should be fencedwith a sturdy stone wall at Government cost to preventmigrating elephants from straying into plantations andcausing damage.d. The fence should be inspected periodically andmaintained.e. Some gaps should be left in the revetmentsupporting the first hairpin bend and steps/slopes takento facilitate easy passage of elephants.7. Pillur–Melur slopes and Bhavani River ValleyUntil recently, on the southern and southwesternslopes of the Nilgiri hills and the Bhavani River valleyabove and west of Mettupalayam, forests extendedwestward until they met the Attapadi Reserved Forest,which is contiguous to the Silent Valley ReservedForest. Now forests remain only on the TamilNadu side. On the Kerala side, the river valley hasbeen converted into flourishing irrigation fields, andthe lower slopes have been denuded and are beingextensively grazed by domestic cattle. The slopesbelow Kinnakorai have been turned into fields evenat the higher levels. The forests were the privateproperties of minor rajas who indiscriminately leasedthem out to cultivation. Had the Government takenaction and made these into reserved forests this maynot have happened.The contiguity between the forests on the TamilNadu side and the Kerala side has been lost. Beyondthe Tamil Nadu border, forests remain only in Attapadiand no movement of elephants between the forestson the two sides is possible. The few elephant herdson the Tamil Nadu side can move up to Manar andPegumbahalla on the Karamadai-Kundah road (and alittle distance up to the border) and not beyond. Evenon the Tamil Nadu side elephant movement is hinderedby power houses no. 3 and 4 of the Kundah hydroelectricscheme, the Pillur dam, large residential campsE.R.C. Davidar et al.in three locations, the penstocks, network of roads,and cultivation. But these are not insurmountableobstacles and elephants have been moving around, upto the border and into the forests across the south of theBhavani River. The restoration of these lost migrationpaths seems rather doubtful.III. The Gudalur PlateauThe Gudalur Plateau is 1,000m on average inelevation. To the west are the tropical evergreen forestsof Nilambur, New Amarambalam, Silent Valley, andto the north and east are the moist mixed deciduousforests thinning into heavy scrub of Mudumalai andBandipur. It was covered with forests (Fletcher 1911)and acted as a link between the forests of Kerala,Tamil Nadu, and Karnataka. The plateau became acenter for mining, and tea and coffee planting in thenineteenth century. These were opened up in theplace of forests. Mines were abandoned when theyfailed but the development of tea, coffee, and forestplantations continued. According to official records,the area occupied by plantations in the Gudalur Talukis 1,200ha (approximately). Unofficially, the area ismuch larger due to encroachments. Now forests remainonly within the Mudumalai Sanctuary limits, on thenorthwestern slopes (above Ouchterlony Valley), andin scattered reserves.In 1969, the Tamil Nadu Tea Plantation CorporationLtd. (TANTEA) moved into the area, and cleared thethickly wooded reserved forests around Cherangode,Cherambadi, and Nelliyalam, and planted tea to settlerepatriates from Sri Lanka. New areas (some weregrasslands) have been taken up in the past three yearsin Devala and Gudalur, and a further extent of 600hahas been added and expansion is in progress.A distinct form of land tenure known as the janmumtenure, which applied to a third of the area, has beenanother unsettling factor. The Tamil Nadu Governmentsought to abolish the janmum tenure by legalizationwhich is known as the “Gudalur Janmum Estates”(Abolition and Conversion into Riotwari) Act, 1969.Litigation over the enactment has been dragging on.Taking advantage of this unsettled situation, largescaleto forcible occupation of janman [or janmun]lands has been taking place. It has become a free forall where profits were high, except for wildlife.It would be a great advantage to wild elephants ifthe old links between Nilambur-New Amarambalam-3290Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–3293

Elephant migration in the late 1970sSilent Valley and Mudumalai-Bandipur could berestored across the Gudalur plateau. But this is not apossibility. A new link may have to be forged. Eventhis is extremely difficult as there are many obstacles,the worst being the squatters who have reducedcriminal trespass into a fine art. The squatter problemhas become a political issue, most of the oppositionparties and even the Government of Kerala opposeevictions.Besides, getting elephants used to new migrationpaths in the form of corridors is not going to be easy.The slopes overlooking the Ouchterlony valley wouldhave provided an ideal migration link, but it is cut-offat the Gudalur end of plantations and settlements. Fora long time there has been no sign of elephants usingthese slopes for migration.[In order to setup corridors], two routes havebeen suggested - one cutting right across the Gudalurplateau, and the other skirting the plateau (and partlythrough the Ootacamund Taluk) along its easternborder. Both start at different points in the MudumalaiSanctuary and terminate at about the same area on theTamil Nadu-Kerala border. It is desirable that bothare attempted and at least sections are preserved forthe day when public opinion demands a better deal forelephants.8. The Benne (Mudumalai)-Needlerock - NewAmarambalam corridor[The full length of the proposed corridor isE.R.C. Davidar et al.described in Table 1.] A corridor across TANTEA’snew Gudalur and Devala divisions, stretching fromthe Kerala border to the Rockwood Reserve, is a longand vital link. A 200m wide path could be in the formof a fuel reserve. High priority is accorded to thiscorridor because tree planting has just begun here soit is still possible to preserve this stretch. Even if itbecomes impossible to set up a corridor for its wholelength from New Amarambalam to Mudumalai, thisTANTEA stretch alone would enable elephants tomove at least up to Rockwood Reserve and NeedleRock as before.As far as other big tea estates on the path areconcerned, they may be allowed to retain the corridorland involved on the condition that the corridor landis developed as fuel reserve and allows the passage ofelephants.9. The Mudumalai-Ouchterlony valley Nilambur -New Amarambalam corridor[The full length of the proposed corridor isdescribed in Table 2.] Solitary elephants do stray asfar as Burnside Estate from the Kerala side, and thecorridor is traced following their route. From belowBurnside Estate the corridor will be almost whollyalong the bed of the Pandey River and tributaries. Theproblem to overcome will be the squatters occupyingthe banks on either side. Passage through developedestates will be most difficult as there are lines [workers’quarters], buildings, etc. Where passage through estateTable 1. The proposed Benne (Mudumalai)-Needlerock-New Amarambalam corridorSuggested waypointsDistanceCorridor 200 m wide from the Mudumalai Sanctuary on the Benne boundary on either side of the Benne-Mukatti forest roadPassing through two small coffee estates until it reaches the Gudalur–Sultan’s Battery road at MukattiAcross the Gudalur-Sultan’s Battery road at Mukatti into the Gadsbrook Government Reserved Forest (eucalyptus plantation) whichcan act as a corridor in itselfBeyond the Government reserve into the adjoining tea estate, across the border of the estateFrom the tea estate into the small private holdings mainly encroachments about 1-2 acres, each planted with paddy and jackfruit,owned by 15 to 20 familiesAcross the Mukatti-Ponari road into a small tea estate the corridor skirting the Sussex division of the Woodbriar Group of tea estatesAcross Sussex Division ReservePast the Devala-Nilakotai road and skirting the eastern flank of the Needlerock peakThrough Government Cinchona Department where a new plantation from Needlerock is destroying the natural forestsOn the eastern side of Needlerock through the Devarshola Estate Reserve of Tea Estate India Ltd.Across the new divisions (Devala and Gudalur) of TANTEA up to Marapalam on the Gudalur–Devala roadAcross the Gudalur–Devala road through TANTEA clearings to the Kerala border thus joining Mudumalai and Nilambur-NewAmarambalam Reserved Forests2km1.5km3km1km2km2km3km4km4km7kmJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–32933291

Elephant migration in the late 1970sE.R.C. Davidar et al.Table 2. The proposed Mudumalai-Ouchterlony Valley Nilambur-New Amarambalam corridor.Suggested waypointsA corridor the width of 200 m starting from the south-east corner of Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary at the point where it crosses theMoyar River below Thorapalli into Thodmoyar and along the river up to the southern boundary of Thodmoyar Estate through theNorthern Hay Reserved ForestSkirting Chikmoyar Estate border through the government cinchona plantation (the Naduvattam Reserved Forest being in possessionof the cinchona plantation) up to the point where it meets the Ooty-Gudalur road on the second hairpin bend from Gudalur, aboveSilver Cloud Estate bungalowInto the reserved forest above the Ooty-Gudalur road through the HasanBava Estate up to the third hairpin bendAcross the road at the 3 rd hairpin bend across patta lands along the lower HasanBava Estate boundary (between the ManjushreeEstate, GudalurMalai Division new planting and lower Bava Estate new planting). Into the forest in the middle section of the easternslopes of GudalurMalai (Nellibetta Rock)Up the eastern slopes (middle section) of the GudalurMalai then down the slopesAbove the hill slope above the road until the Gudalur–Seaforth road is reached at a point between 6 and 7 km and below BurnsideEstate. It may be noted that the hill and slopes west of Gudalur are heavily encroached upon and there are estate lines. The passagemay be virtually impossibleSkirting west of Burnside Estate and down the slopes until the Chundi River (Pandey River in maps) is reached 100 m on eitherside of Chundi River through Ouchterlony Valley (Manjushree’s New Hope) Estate into Seaforth Estate following the river untilChunnambpallam is reached. It may be noted that the lands on either side of the river are heavily encroachedFrom Chunambalam along the Chundi River and other streams to the Peria Shola Tea EstateThrough Umbilimalai Estate along streams to Nilambur and New Amarambalam forestDistance3km3km1km2km2km4km3km4km7kmreserves becomes necessary, estates could develop fuelreserves.IV. The upper plateauThe Nilgiri mountains flatten out into a plateauroughly 900km 2 in area, above 1,500m in elevation,with temperate conditions prevailing. Before the 1850s,the plateau consisted of mostly southern montanegrasslands interspersed with southern subtropicalhill forest (sholas) and scrub. A considerable area ofgrasslands and sholas have disappeared yielding placeto plantations. This worsened due to the increasingsize of towns and encroachments on Government land.Only the southwest parts of the plateau retain some ofthe original Nilgiri habitat. In recent years elephantswere recorded with higher frequency, and this may bebecause of degradation of their habitats at the lowerelevation.There are three routes up the slopes to Upper Bhavanifrom the Attapadi-Silent Valley-New Amarambalamforests. One route is up the Galisi-Todiki slopeskirting the Korakundah Estate, the second is up theBhavanipuzha-Bison swamp slope, and the third is theSispara bridle path through the Sispara pass [corridor10]. Only small elephant herds are regular visitors.As more pressure builds up at lower elevations, largerherds are expected to come to the plateau. This shouldbe encouraged [because this area might function as arefuge].At present there are no impediments to elephantsroaming over this entire area except for the upperBhavani dam water spread. However, there is aproposal to build dams that might be obstacles acrossthe path of elephants. There is a proposal to minebauxite in the range of hills at Lakkidi (eastern end ofupper Bhavani) to feed Malco’s aluminium factory atMettur. [This mining project has not been implementedso far.]It is recommended that:a. It is important that the Upper Bhavani countryshould continue to remain a wilderness area.b. The proposal of the electricity board to buildfurther dams in this area should be abandoned.c. The bauxite mining proposal at Lakkidi shouldalso be given up.Conclusion[It emerges from this work that elephant habitatin coastal areas of Kerala (Silent Valley, Attapadi) areisolated from inland habitats ranging from Nagarhole toMudumalai to Bhavanisagar. Consequently, rainforesthabitats are now isolated from drier type of forests.3292Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–3293

Elephant migration in the late 1970sAnd elephants can no more circle the Nilgiris, as they probably used todo, to find better feeding grounds. However, this state of affairs shouldnot prevent the search for solutions. Forging new corridors, reshapingboundaries between village lands and reserved forests in order to preventconflicts with elephants, remains a priority.]The considerations that weighed uppermost when makingrecommendations was that they should be pragmatic and capable ofimplementation. Care was taken not to propose any grandiose schemes.The recommendations are modest and should be workable. For thesuccess of projects of this nature it is essential that local sympathies arenot alienated. The cooperation and support of local people should besought and obtained.Lines of action and priorities have been indicated. Naturally therecommendations vary to suit the local conditions. While some requirepositive action, in the case of others all that is required is a safeguard thatthe prevailing conditions are not disturbed. Of course, the most importantrequirement is enthusiasm on the part of the concerned authorities, andthe political will to put the recommendations into effect.ReferencesChampion, H. & S. Seth (1968). A Revised Survey of The Forest Types of India.Government of India Press, xxvii+404pp.Davidar, E.R.C. (1978). Distribution and status of the Nilgiri Tahr Hemitragushylocrius, 1975–1978. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 75: 815–844.Fletcher, F.W.F. (1911). Sport on the Nilgiris and in Wyanad. MacMillan, London,xvii+455pp.GRASS Development Team (2010). Geographic Resources Analysis Support System(GRASS) Software, Version 6.4.0. Open Source Geospatial Foundation. http://grass.osgeo.org.Johnsingh, A.J.T. & A.C. Williams (1999). Elephant corridors in India: lessons forother Elephant range countries. Oryx 33(3): 210–214.Menon, V., V. Tiwari, S. Easa & R. Sukumar (2005). Right of Passage: ElephantCorridors of India. Wildlife Trust of India, 287pp.Prabhakar, R. & J.-P. Pascal (1996). Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve Area. Vegetationand land use.Map 1:100,000. Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute ofScience and the French Institute of Pondicherry, Pondicherry.Quantum GIS Development Team (2011). Quantum GIS Geographic InformationSystem. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. http://qgis.osgeo.org.Santiapillai, C. & P. Jackson (1990). The Asian Elephant: An Action Plan for ItsConservation. IUCN, 80pp.Tamil Nadu Forest Department (2009). Report of the Expert Committee Formedin Pursuance of the Direction of the Hon’ble High Court in W.P.N.10098/2008,2762 & 2839 of 2009. Unpublished. http://www.forests.tn.nic.in/graphics/Expert_Committee_Report.pdf, 98pp.E.R.C. Davidar et al.Acknowledgements1981: We thank Mr. A.M. Mahmood HussainIFS, Additional Chief Conservator of Forests,Tamil Nadu Forest Department, and Y.S.Kadakshamani IFS, DFO Coimbatore for theirformal permission to work in Mudumalai andCoimbatore Reserved Forests. But for theenthusiasm of Mr. J.C. Daniel, Chairman, AsianElephant Specialist Group, this study wouldnot have been possible. We also thank him formeeting the expenditure incurred on the study.We owe a debt of gratitude to the plantingcommunity who helped and shared information.We thank Mr. B. Palaniappan, Group Manager,Woodbriar Estate Ltd., Mr. C. RamachandraRao, Group Manager, Manjushree Plantations,Ltd., Mr. V.A. Krishnan, Senior Manager,Kilkotagiri Estates, Mr. K. Madappa, Manager,Korakundah Estate, Mr. E. Luke, Manager,Periashola Estate, Mr. D.R.B. Tyman, ManagingDirector, Tea Estates India Ltd., and Mr. A.Arunachalam IFS, Managing Director, TANTEA.Mr. Jude Michael, Shikari Bokkan, and informantMari of Sirur helped on the many treks. To thosewho are going to initiate action on this report andimplement the recommendations we wish themsuccess.2011: We thank Dr. Ajay Desai (Co-Chair, AsianElephant Specialist Group), Dr. Simon Hedges(Co-Chair, Asian Elephant Specialist Group),and Dr. Simon Stuart, Chair, IUCN SpeciesSurvival Commission, for their initial interest inthis publication. Dr. Asad Rahmani (Director,BNHS) and Dr. Ajay Desai kindly granted uspermission to utilise the draft and publish it.We thank the Journal of Threatened Taxa andin particular the Founder & Chief Editor, Dr.Sanjay Molur, for their enlightened editorialpolicy, and an anonymous referee of the Journalof Threatened Taxa for constructive comments.Dr. S. Jayakumar, Department of Ecology andEnvironmental Sciences, Pondicherry University,kindly provided us the elevation map of theregion.Author Details: The late E.R.C. Da v id a r was alawyer by profession and a conservationist. Hepioneered studies on the Nilgiri tahr, elephantcorridors, the dhole and the striped hyena. Heestablished what may be the first ever privatereserve in India and has authored a book on therecent ecological history of the Nilgiris.Pe t e r Da v id a r holds a MPhil in Wildlife Biology.He has undertaken surveys on elephant corridorsand is presently a trustee of the Sigur NatureTrust, a private wildlife corridor. He is interestedin wildlife photography.Pr i y a Da v id a r is a professor of ecology at thePondicherry University. She teaches conservationbiology and behavior. Her research interestsspan over the fields of biogeography, biodiversity,pollination ecology and conservation.Je a n-Ph i l ip p e Pu y r a v a u d is an ecologist associatedwith ECOS, a trust for the conservation ofnature. His main interest is habitat managementfor endangered species. He advises MSc andPhD students of the Pondicherry University inresearch methodology and landscape ecology.Author Contribution: ERCD was the principalinvestigator of this project. He designed thestudy, conducted the field surveys and wrote alonger unpublished version of this paper for theAsian Elephant Specialist Group of the IUCN.PeD assisted in the field survey. PrD assistedwith editorial work of the first version and helpedrevise the abridged version of the paper. J-PPrevised and edited this abridged version of thepaper, and prepared the maps.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3284–32933293

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3294–3301Wild Water Buffalo Bubalus arnee in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve,Nepal: status, population and conservation importanceTop Bahadur Khatri 1 , Deep Narayan Shah 2 & Nilamber Mishra 31,2Conservation and Sustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal (CSUWN), Training Section Building, Second floor, Forestry Complex,Babar Mahal, Kathmandu, Nepal3Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Paschim Kusaha, Sunsari, NepalEmail: 1 tbkhatri@wetlands.org.np, 2 shahdeepnarayan@yahoo.com (corresponding author), 3 nmishra@yahoo.comDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: L.A.K. SinghManuscript details:Ms # o2990Received 06 November 2011Final received 09 July 2012Finally accepted 29 September 2012Citation: Khatri, T.B., D.N. Shah & N. Mishra(2012). Wild Water Buffalo Bubalus arnee inKoshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal: status,population and conservation importance. Journalof Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3294–3301.Copyright: © Top Bahadur Khatri, Deep NarayanShah & Nilamber Mishra 2012. CreativeCommons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in anymedium for non-profit purposes, reproductionand distribution by providing adequate credit tothe authors and the source of publication.Author Details: To p Ba h a d u r Kh a t r i’s researchinterests are in resource management, parkpeopleinterface, community stewardship andwetland conservation in Asia. He has beenimplementing various integrated conservationand development projects in and around theprotected areas of Nepal for over two decades.De e p Na r a y a n Sh a h’s research interests are inbiodiversity, community ecology, biogeography,population genetics and conservation biology.In particular, he focuses on the influence ofglobal climate and human land-use changeon animal population and communities. Hehas been conducting research in the HinduKush Himalayan region and is associated withseveral national and international scientificorganizations.Ni l a m b e r Mis h r a’s research interests are in theecology and conservation of the large mammalsof South Asia. He has been working asConservation Officer (Warden) in the protectedareas of Nepal for over two decades.Author Contribution: DNS conceived, designedand performed the study and wrote up the paper.TBK planned the study and NM contributed in thestudy design and performed field study.Acknowledgements: See end of this article.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:263B7577-CE69-44F2-9A96-13A775791AF5OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADAbstract: The Asiatic Wild Water Buffalo Bubalus arnee is an endangered speciesrestricted to South and Southeast Asia. Nepal’s only population survives in the KoshiTappu Wildlife Reserve which is located on the floodplain of the Koshi River, a tributaryof Ganga. This species is under threat due to high anthropogenic pressure rangingfrom habitat deterioration to hybridization with domestic buffalo. Yet, the population hasgrown from 63 in 1976 to 219 in 2009, despite the decline in the calf/cow ratio. Thepresent study conducted in 2009 used the block count method. The count showed thepresence of a backcrossed population of 74 in addition to the total of 219 individuals. Atpresent, a number of conservation and livelihood interventions have been undertakento safeguard the biodiversity, particularly the wild buffalo population in the Koshi TappuWildlife Reserve. The community-based sustainable management approach benefitingboth conservation and livelihood of local people is necessary to ensure the long termconservation of the species.Keywords: Bubalus arnee, Critically Endangered, Koshi flood, population census.IntroductionThe genus Bubalus was widely distributed in Europe and southern Asiain the Pleistocene age, but was later restricted to the Indian subcontinentand Southeast Asia (Mason 1974). Today, the Asiatic Wild Water BuffaloBubalus arnee (Bubalus bubalis Groves 1981) occurs in India, Nepal,Bhutan, Myanmar, Thailand and Cambodia. They are associated withwet grasslands, swamps and densely vegetated river valleys. They havebeen extirpated in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Laos and Vietnam. Nepal’s onlypopulation thrives in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (KTWR) which islocated on the floodplain of a snow-fed perennial river, Koshi, a tributaryof Ganga. The KTWR was gazetted in 1976 to preserve the habitat for theonly remaining population of Bubalus arnee here as Arna in Nepal. Thisspecies is categorized as Endangered (Hedges et al. 2008) on the IUCNRed List.The wild water buffalo is highly endangered, with a world populationconsidered by FAO to be certainly fewer than 4000 animals (Scherf2000). Scherf (2000) indicated that small isolated populations mayremain in the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve (Nepal), Bastar and Raipurdistricts of Madhya Pradesh and Manas Wildlife Sanctuary/Project TigerReserve (India), Royal Manas National Park (Bhutan), and Huai KhaKhaeng Wildlife Sanctuary (Thailand), as these populations are believedto have been least affected by interbreeding with domestic and/or feralbuffalo. Flamand et al. (2003) confirmed eight out of 10 wild buffalosamples to be of pure wild variety genetically at KTWR. The census of3294Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–3301

Arna in Koshi TappuArna in KTWR has been carried out since 1976 andtill now five censuses have been conducted at fouruneven intervals over a 34-year period. The mostrecent census was in 2004 that estimated a populationof 159 wild buffalo, and a highly backcrossed, semiferalpopulation of 49 animals (Heinen & Kandel2006). The global and national status of this species asdocumented by IUCN’s Asian Wild Cattle and BuffaloSpecialist Group and the American Zoo Associationsuggested that appropriate management is of thehighest conservation priority.The KTWR has faced Reserve-people conflictssince its establishment. The effect of humandisturbance varies greatly, depending on the natureand its intensity. Therefore, realizing the abovesituation, the Government of Nepal in 2004, declareda surrounding area of 173.5km 2 as a buffer zone.This is one of the country’s innovative strategies forparticipatory conservation, emphasizing a bufferzone mechanism designed to reduce the adverseimpact of protected areas on the livelihoods oflocal communities and vice versa. The total humanpopulation of the buffer zone in 2009 was 93,323 from16,280 households. As mandated by the Buffer ZoneManagement Regulations, the buffer zone is entitledto receive a 50% share of the revenue generated by theKTWR for community development activities. Themoney received is channeled through the user groups.These user groups are formed at the settlement leveland are responsible for the planning, management andsupervision of the activities implemented.The Koshi River meanders and passes through theKTWR. The river not only shapes the physical featuresof the region, but also modifies the ecosystem of thearea and has profound impact on the socio-economiccharacteristics of the local communities of the bufferzone residents. The Koshi River, which changes itscourse quite rapidly across years, changed its maincourse dramatically during the monsoon of 2008and breached a 2km stretch and entered the humansettlements through Kushaha Village (Khatri et al.2010a). This sudden shift in the course of Koshi Riverhas had a profound effect in the physical landscapeand subsequent impacts towards human settlementand their agricultural fields. Large tracts of forest nearPrakashpur Village and grasslands in the eastern partof the region were totally washed away. The Koshibreach brought untold misery and loss to the lives ofT.B. Khatri et al.people, not only of Nepal but also of India. After thebreach of the eastern embankment, efforts were madeto revert the main channel back to its original courseby employing over hundreds of heavy machines andequipments backed by a strong fleet of over 1000personnel for a period of over one year. The Reservehad to cope with all the externalities like temporarysettlements within the reserve, supply of fuel woodand fodder, excessive use of local resources by bothlocal people as well as by the construction companythat was engaged in the repair and maintenance workof the breached embankment. During the course ofrepair and maintenance, six male Arna were moved5km south of the barrage (in Gobargarha Village)from their habitat due to the high level of disturbance.During this period, the reserve had to bear the brunt ofthis natural disaster.During the period of political instability andconflict, all the security posts were damaged andthe security personnel were withdrawn and mergedwithin the reserve headquarters, Kushaha. As a result,law enforcement became very weak due to whichencroachment, illegal grazing, harvesting of resourcesbecame rampant.The main threat to the wild buffalo is the continuedmixing and mingling of the wild and the domesticstocks resulting in hybridization. In addition, as a resultof the Koshi flood of 2008, there were speculationsof a wide scale loss of this species. Therefore, toascertain the status, a census was conducted jointlyby the Department of National Parks and WildlifeConservation (DNPWC) and the Conservation andSustainable Use of Wetlands in Nepal (CSUWN).Here we report the current findings and compare itwith earlier censuses. Furthermore, we have assessedthe current management practices to provide futuremanagement guidance.Materials and methodsStudy areaKTWR (86 0 55’–87 0 05’E & 26 0 34’–26 0 45’N)lies in the alluvial flood plains of the Koshi River ofeastern Nepal (Fig. 1). The flood plain is a complexmosaic of lotic and lentic ecosystems, characterized bygrassy marshes, oxbow lakes, swamp lakes and manydepressions which retain water throughout the year.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–33013295

Arna in Koshi TappuThe KTWR has subtropical climate and its topographyranges from 75–100 m. It covers a 175km 2 core areaand a 173.5km 2 buffer zone consisting of 16 VDCs(Village Development Committees) that spread acrossthree districts of Sunsari, Saptari and Udayapur.The KTWR was established in 1976 and designatedas the first ‘Ramsar site’ of Nepal in 1987 because ofits extensive wetlands which accommodate winteringwaterfowl of international importance. It is subject toextreme flooding from June to September. Over 80%of the area is dominated by grasses (e.g. Typha sp.,Vetivera sp., Phragmites sp., Saccharum sp., etc.) andbeaches, with forests of Bombax sp., Dalbergia sp.and Acacia sp. elsewhere (Sah 1997).T.B. Khatri et al.MethodsThe study area in general was assessed andexplored to get an overview to design the strategiesand methodologies for the count. Additionally, localconsultations, information from the reserve staff andfrom past population surveys was gathered. Basedon these exercises, the block count method (Skinner& Smithers 1990) was employed. The count wascarried out both by foot and with the use of elephants.The census was conducted in April–May 2009, whenvisibility was the highest and water discharge wasat the lowest. A repeat count was done for threeconsecutive days.The KTWR is rectangular in shape, where SaptaBhagalpur (Belha)KamalpurJagatpurBadagamaFigure 1. Study site showing Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve and its Buffer Zone3296Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–3301

Arna in Koshi TappuKoshi, Mariya and Trijuga rivers flow from north tosouth. The study area was divided into four blocks,two blocks east and two blocks west of Koshi River(Fig. 1).Block A: This block lies east of Koshi River andsouth of power line (Haripur/Kushaha area). The areacomprises open grassland (Sacchram sp.) interspersedwith a small patch of riverine forest (Dalbergia/Acaciasp.).Block B: This block lies east of Koshi River andnorth of power line (Madhuwan area and PrakashpurSide Island). The major habitat of this block is riverinei.e. Khair Sisso forest, tall grassland of Sachhram sp.and Typha sp. (pater). This block has a tributary and afew constructed pilot channels.Block C: This block lies west of Koshi River andnorth to power line (Pathariside Island, Bhagalpurand Kamalpur area). It has open grassland and smallpatches of Khair/Sisso forest. This block had heavygrazing pressure.Block D: This block lies west of Koshi Riverand south of power line (Badgama/Jagatpur area). Ithas open grassland and small patches of Khair/Sissoforest. This block also has heavy grazing pressure. Atleast 1km stretch along the western boundary has beenencroached on for agricultural practices as well.A complete sweep through the direct count methodwas employed in each block. A total of 60 surveyorswere spread across different blocks with the distancekept visible to each other during the movement.Binoculars, camera and global positioning system(GPS) were used as and when required during thesurvey.The wild buffalo was recognized by the behaviouraland phenotypic traits such as white chevron, socks andtip of tail, and larger, relatively straight, pale-colouredhorns (similar to swamp buffalo). These criteria foridentifying wild buffalo from feral backcrosses werealso used in earlier studies (Dahmer 1978; Heinen1993a; Heinen & Singh 2001; Heinen 2002; Heinen& Kandel 2006).The population growth rate was calculated percapita per time period by the exponential growthformula r i= ln(N j/N k)t (Heinen & Kandel 2006), wherer i= growth rate calculated for that time interval, ln =natural logarithm, N j= population size at the end ofthe interval, N k= population size at the beginning ofthe interval, and t = number of years in the interval.T.B. Khatri et al.Focus group discussion: In order to identifythe existing threats and challenges to the existingpopulation, a focus group discussion was conductedin addition to field observation. The group discusseddifferent issues and their opinions towards measuresto minimize local threats were documented.ResultsThe current study recorded a total of 219 wild waterbuffaloes (Table 1 and 2). Block A area comprised ofa large herd of Arna with a single dominant male, itsoffspring including a subadult male group of sevenand some isolated single males. The largest number ofArna was recorded from this block (Table 1). In BlockB, the second largest herd of Arna was recorded. Asmall herd of subadult males and some isolated singlemales were also recorded. Only small herds of Arnawere present in block C and block D. The populationgrowth (r i) over a 34-year time period is 0.037 (Table3). The population structure of Arna in KTWR from1976 to 2009 (Table 2) shows that the calf to cow ratiois on a continuous decreasing trend. The ratio is afunction of calve birth and survival in the first year.Therefore, the trend raises conservation concerns.The feral and domesticated livestock were foundto be in high numbers during this study, especially inblock C and D (Table 4). The number of backcrossedbuffalo was high in 2000 it sharply decreased in 2004but again increased in 2009 (Table 5).Table 1. Block wise population status of wild buffalo atKTWRBlock Male Female1st yearcalf2nd yearcalfTotalA 31 49 12 7 99B 15 51 9 12 87C 2 6 1 0 9D 7 13 1 3 24Total 55 119 23 22 219Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–33013297

Arna in Koshi TappuT.B. Khatri et al.Table 2. The population structure of wild buffalo in KTWR from 1976 to 2009, with the calf to cow ratioYearAdultsCalvesMale Female 2nd year 1st yearTotal Calves/cows Source1976 12 18 22 11 63 0.61 Dahmer (1978)1987 32 29 14 16 91 0.55 Heinen (1993b)1988 37 33 8 15 93 0.45 Heinen (1993b)2000 56 53 17 19 145 0.36 Heinen & Singh (2001)2004 54 63 24 18 159 0.29 Heinen & Kandel (2006)2009 55 119 22 23 219 0.19 Present studyTable 3. Population growth rate of water buffalo over thetime period at KTWRTime interval1976 to 2009 (R tot) 0.0371976 to 1987 (r1) 0.0331987 to 1988 (r2) 0.0221988 to 2000 (r3) 0.0372000 to 2004 (r4) 0.0232004 to 2009 (r5) 0.064riTable 4. The number of feral and domestic livestock insideKTWR counted in 2009BlockFeral animalBuffaloes (backcrossed)Domesticated animal(cattle)Cows Buffaloes CowsA 35 129 120 805B 7 0 0 0C 15 567 355 1623D 17 255 819 725Total 74 951 1394 3353Table 5. The number of backcrossed buffalo counted in KTWR. The number greatly decreased in 2004 compared to 2000 asa result of a shooting campaign. The Army began shooting buffalo of domestic origin in 2001. By March 2004, 167 buffalohad been shot inside the reserve (source: Reserve records 2005). However, this policy was controversial because someillegally grazed domestic animals were killed and the Army has since halted the culling. As a consequence, the number isgradually increasing.Year Females 2nd year calves 1st year calves Totals Source2000 80 29 22 131 Heinen & Singh 20012004 32 7 10 49 Heinen & Kandel 20062009 44 17 13 74 Present studyDiscussionThe two large herds of block A and B that wererecorded in this census were also recorded by theprevious surveys (Heinen 1993b; Heinen & Singh2001; Heinen 2002; Heinen & Kandel 2006). Theseherds of blocks A & B which consist of females andcalves were considered to be pure wild stock (Heinen& Kandel 2006). These herds have remained intheir original form since decades; this could be dueto better protection afforded through the presence ofrange posts and security posts in the vicinity. There isregular patrolling in these blocks. In contrast, blocksC and D have high disturbance due to grazing andother human activities. As a result, a low number ofArna was recorded from these blocks.The population growth (r i) over a 34-year timeperiod was high overall but variable for blocks of 9–12years. The adult sex ratio was female-biased in 1976,2004 (Heinen & Kandel 2006) and again in 2009, butmale-biased in the three intervening censuses. Mostlarge mammal populations have female-biased adultsex ratios (Bronson 1989; Heinen & Kandel 2006).The calf/cow ratio has reduced significantly overthe whole time period. The calf/cow ratio reportedfor Arna in KTWR in all cases are consistent withthe known range of natural inter birth intervals fordomestic buffalo recorded in various studies andthis census also shows the trend going down in calf/cows ratio (3 years; Cockrill 1974). Thus, the3298Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–3301

Arna in Koshi Tappuapparent decline in calf/cow ratio, is possibly attributedeither due to the decline in birth rate or decline of thebreeding populations; or increase in poaching or theftof Arna calf or death due to other reasons.The population of feral cattle was found to behigher than the estimated population in 2000 (Heinen& Singh 2001) which could be attributed to the lackof law enforcement/proper management. Mostly feralcattle were concentrated in blocks C and D, i.e., in thewest of Koshi River as there was no law enforcementdue to the absence of Range Posts and Security Posts.In these blocks, a large number of livestock arecompeting for food with Arna at the same time thereis a high risk of disease transmission. Mortality fromflooding, road accidents, poisoning and retaliatorykilling and the transmission of diseases from domesticand feral livestock are some of the major threats forwild buffaloes. The practice of cross breeding withwild males is still a common practice.The KTWR has had conflicts with local communitiessince its establishment (Heinen 1993b). The peopleliving closer to KTWR are more likely to revealnegative attitudes towards conservation. Educatedpeople and farmers have a positive conservationattitude to some extent while the households withpoor socio-economic status and greater dependenceon the KTWR for firewood, fodder and raw materialspossess a more negative attitude towards conservation(Shrestha & Alavalapati 2006). Poor households areless concerned about conservation, and institutionalsettings and abject poverty near protected areas appearto affect their attitudes. Therefore, for the sustainablemanagement of KTWR and local support for naturalresource conservation, socio-economic developmenthas been initiated since the mid-1990s. The ParkPeople Project (PPP), and Buffer Zone Policy, underimplementation, has been effective in several ways(Heinen & Mehta 2000; Budhathoki 2004; Heinen &Kandel 2006) and many villages have benefited fromthe programs. This was continued by ParticipatoryConservation Project (PCP) and recently by CSUWNproject to improve reserve-people discords by workingtogether to realize the twin objective of conservationand development.The political instability due to the Maoist conflicthad affected conservation programmes nationwideespecially since 2000 (Baral & Heinen 2006; Heinen &Shrestha 2006). The political instability was probablyT.B. Khatri et al.a factor in the decline of the population growth rate(Heinen & Kandel 2006), but the recent surveyshowed a positive trend in the growth. The Maoistconflict created a volatile political situation (Thapa2003) wherein the security units no longer patrolledthe Reserve. Subsequently, the peace process wasestablished in the country after a decade long politicalconflict, the management of the Reserve has also beenimproving. Recently, the KTWR management hasrestored a security post at Pathri, Saptari side, which hasbolstered the law enforcement regime on the westernside. Necessary process is underway to reinstate othersecurity posts in other locations as well.With the support of CSUWN project, a number ofconservation and livelihood interventions have beenundertaken to safeguard the biodiversity, particularlythe wild buffalo population in the KTWR. Themanagement plan of KTWR was finally approved in2010 after a long period. This approval has entitledthe buffer zone communities to receive 50% ofthe revenue earned by the KTWR for communitydevelopment. Table 6 shows the flow of visitorsand revenue earned. There is a progressive flow oftourists both locals and foreigners into the reservearea. By 2011, the Reserve has been able to earn atotal of NPR 11,75,933 compared to the year 2006,where only NPR 395,891 was generated. After theapproval of the management plan the revenue has shotup to NPR 671,097; double the figure earned in theyear 2006. The decrease in the revenue in the year2009 is attributed to the aftermath of the floods thatoccurred in September 2008, after a 2-km stretch ofthe Koshi River embankment was washed away bythe flood resulting in the vast inundation of the easternstretch of the reserve including human settlements andagricultural lands. The revenue generation is largelydependent on the flow of tourism therefore differentprotected areas have different amounts of revenuecollection. The challenge exists for the protectedareas that are resource poor, even though they areas important for conservation as the highly visitedareas. One way to address the resource gap wouldbe to create a basket fund in which revenue generatedfrom resource-rich protected areas could be used tosupport neighbouring areas that are resource poor(Khatri 2010b). But it remains to be seen whetherthe stakeholders of the resource-rich protected areaswould be willing to share their revenue with others inJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–33013299

Arna in Koshi TappuT.B. Khatri et al.Table 6. Flow of visitors and revenue collection in KTWR from 2006-2011Year Nepali Foreigners Revenue in NPR Equivalent US$@732011 452 3203 11,75,933 16108.672010 438 1904 671,097 9193.102009 159 145 224,980 3081.912008 333 1594 591,832 8107.282007 244 1271 424,394 5813.612006 84 881 395,891 5423.16Source: KTWRthe long term.In order to reduce crop depredation by wild animals,a solar powered electric fence has been erected in thehigh impact zone of the eastern sector of the KTWR.This initiative has significantly reduced the existinglocal discord among the local communities and thereserve management. Similarly, with the erection ofthe electric fence, no reports of crop depredation havebeen reported in that area particularly by wild buffaloesand elephants. Similarly, sustained managementinterventions including a community based antipoachingdrive by mobilizing local youths, bufferzone communities, local teachers and eco-clubs hasbrought a positive impact towards the evacuation offeral cattle (cows and buffaloes) from the reserve. Thereserve management with the active support of localcommunities has been able to collect a total of NPR128,000 from the penalties by confiscating a total of426 cattle (both buffaloes and cows) from the Reserve.This was the first evacuation drive ever conducted bythe reserve as it is still a highly contested politicalissue. As a result, Table 7 shows the reduction in thenumber of feral and domesticated cattle recorded inthe reserve. Since, no forest resources exist outsideof the reserve there is a high level of grazing pressurefrom both feral as well as domestic stock.A multipronged approach towards reducing theherd size of the dometic livestock by replacing it witha more productive one together with the promotionof stall feeding practice would eventually reduce thepressure on the reserve. To address the above situation,KTWR has been promoting block plantation along thewestern boundary of the reserve in order to create agreen belt to allow local people to collect fodder fortheir livestock, thus discouraging illegal grazing.With the mix of alternative options of creating autility zone for rotational cattle grazing and fodderTable 7. Number of feral cattle recorded in 2011Name ofblockSource: KTWRFeral cattleBuffaloes(backcrossed)Domesticatedlivestock (cattle)Cows Buffaloes CowsA 8 0 0 300B 5 0 0 0C 5 105 195 1025D 0 355 215 305Total 18 455 410 1630collection backed by a strong law enforcement regimewill ultimately offset the current pressure exerted onthe reserve.Under the aegis of CSUWN project, a tourismdevelopment strategy has been explored to look intothe possibilities of how to develop tourism productsthat could benefit local people and to develop localstewardship towards conservation. Likewise, variouslivelihood improvement activities for wetlanddependent communities such as fisheries, poultries,and wetland based green enterprise, vegetable farming,have been supported to improve the socio-economiccondition of the people.The current increase in the population doesn’tprovide solace, as there are a number of challenges tothe long term survival of this species. A multiprongedapproach of conservation and development bymobilizing the buffer zone communities backed by astrong law enforcement regime would create an idealenvironment to address the current management issuesand concerns related to protection and conservation.The first priority should be towards enhancingconservation and harnessing the byproducts ofconservation for local benefit.3300Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–3301

Arna in Koshi TappuReferencesBaral, N. & J.T. Heinen (2006). The Maoist People’s War andconservation in Nepal. Politics and the Life Sciences 24:1–11.Bronson, F.H. (1989). Mammalian Reproductive Biology.University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA, 325ppBudhathoki, P. (2004). Linking communities with conservationin developing countries: buffer zone management initiativesin Nepal. Oryx 38: 334–341.Cockrill, W.R. (1974). The Husbandry and Health of theDomestic Buffalo. FAO, Rome, Italy, 1007ppDahmer, T.D. (1978). Status and distribution of the Wild AsianBuffalo (Bubalus bubalis) in Nepal. MS thesis, Universityof Montana, Missoula, USA.Flamand, J.R.B., D. Vankan, G.P. Ghaire, H. Duong & J.S.F.Barker (2003). Genetic identification of Wild Asian WaterBuffalo in Nepal. Animal Conservation 6: 265–270.Groves, C.P. (1981). Systematic relationships in the Bovini(Artiodactyla, Bovidae). Zeitschrift fur ZoologischeSystematik und Evolutionsforschung 19: 264–278.Hedges, S. (1995). Asian Wild Cattle and Buffalo: Draft StatusReport and Conservation Action Plan (Parts I and II).Unpublished Report, IUCN Gland, Switzerland.Hedges, S., H.S. Baral, R.J. Timmins & J.W. Duckworth(2008). Bubalus arnee. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red Listof Threatened Species. Version 2012.1. . Downloaded on 16 October 2012.Heinen, J.T. (1993a). Population viability and managementrecommendations for wild water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis)in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal. BiologicalConservation 65: 29–34.Heinen, J.T. (1993b). Park-people relations in Koshi TappuWildlife Reserve, Nepal: a socio-economic analysis.Environmental Conservation 20: 25–34.Heinen, J.T. & J.N. Mehta (2000). Emerging issues in legaland procedural aspects of buffer zone management withcase studies from Nepal. Journal of Environment andDevelopment 9: 45–67.Heinen, J.T. (2002). Phenotypic and behavioral characteristicsused to identify wild buffalo from feral backcrosses inNepal. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 99:173–183.Heinen, J.T. & R. Kandel (2006). Threats to a smallpopulation: a census and conservation recommendationrecommendations for Wild Buffalo Bubalus arnee in Nepal.Oryx 40: 324–330.Heinen, J.T. & S.K. Shrestha (2006). Evolving policies forconservation: an historical profile of the protected areasystem of Nepal. Journal of Environmental Planning andManagement 49: 41–58.Heinen, J.T. & Singh, G.R. (2001). A census and somemanagement implications for wild buffalo in Nepal.Biological Conservation 101: 391–394.Heinen, J.T. & S. Srikosamatara (1996). Status and protectionT.B. Khatri et al.of Asian wild cattle and buffalo. Conservation Biology 10:931–934.IUCN (2010). IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.Version 2010.4, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. . Downloaded on 25 May 2011.Khatri, T.B., D.N. Shah & N. Mishra (2010a). Post-floodstatus of the Endangered Ganges River Dolphin Platanistagangetica gangetica (Cetartiodactyla: Platanistidae) in theKoshi River, Nepal. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2(13):1365–1371.Khatri, T.B. (2010b). Conservation governance in Nepal:protecting forest biodiversity and people’s livelihoods.Unasylva 236: 61Mason, I.L. (1974). Species types and breeds, pp. 1–47. In:Cockrill, W.R. (ed.). The Husbandry and Health of TheDomestic Buffalo. Rome, Italy, Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations.Read, B. (1999). Bison, Buffalo and Cattle Taxon AdvisoryGroup. Unpublished Regional Collection Plan, AmericanZoo and Aquarium Association, Washington, DC, USA.Sah, J.P. (1997). Koshi Tappu Wetlands: Nepal’s RamsarSite. IUCN Southeast Asia Regional Coordination Office,Bangkok, Thailand, 254ppScherf, B.D. (2000). World Watch List for Domestic AnimalDiversity - 3rd Edition. Rome, Italy, Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations, 746ppSkinner J.D. & R.H.N. Smithers (1990). The Mammals ofthe Southern African Subregion. University of Pretoria,Pretoria, 771ppShrestha, R.K. & J.R.R. Alavalapati (2006). Linkingconservation and development: An analysis of localpeople’s attitude towards Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve,Nepal. Environment, Development and Sustainability 8:69–84.Thapa, D. (2003). A Kingdom Under Siege: Nepal’s MaoistInsurgency, 1996 to 2003. The Print house, Kathmandu,Nepal, 278ppAcknowledgement: We thank the Conservation and Sustainable Use ofWetlands in Nepal (CSUWN) project, a joint undertaking of the Ministryof Forests and Soil Conservation (MFSC), Global Environmental Facility(GEF), and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) for thefinancial support. We thank officers and staff, especially RamchandraKandel and Ashok Ram for serving as members of the technical team.We also thank CSUWN staff, KTWR staff, Raj Kumar Singh, and all otherassistants who were involved in the census.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3294–33013301

JoTT Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3302–3311Reassessment of morphology and historical distributionas factors in conservation efforts for the EndangeredPatagonian Huemul Deer Hippocamelus bisulcus (Molina1782)Huemul Task Force *International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Species Survival Commission (SSC), C\o Chair, C.C. 592, 8400 Bariloche,Argentina,Email: HTF@deerlab.orgDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: Norma ChapmanManuscript details:Ms # o3088Received 30 January 2011Final received 22 October 2012Finally accepted 24 October 2012Citation: Huemul Task Force (2012).Reassessment of morphology and historicaldistribution as factors in conservation effortsfor the Endangered Patagonian Huemul DeerHippocamelus bisulcus (Molina 1782). Journalof Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3302–3311.Copyright: © Huemul Task Force 2012. CreativeCommons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in anymedium for non-profit purposes, reproductionand distribution by providing adequate credit tothe authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: The Huemul Task Forcewould like to thank the non-author groupmembers: Paulo Corti, Robin Gill, WilliamMcShea, and Cristian Saucedo.* Individual authors: Eduardo G. Aisen, FernandoVidal, Gladys Garay, Jaime E. Jiménez, Jo AnneSmith-Flueck, Norberto Tomas, Patricia Black deDecima, Valerius Geist, Werner Flueck, ZygmuntGizejewski.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:06EA2E12-F321-40B3-BE88-86B86A2CE2BBAbstract: To assist with conservation of Endangered Patagonian Huemul Deer(Hippocamelus bisulcus), the Huemul Task Force (HTF) reassessed information onappendicular morphology, paleobiogeography, and historical distribution as potentialfactors in recovery efforts. Traditional claims of being a mountain specialist of theAndes were refuted by empirical evidence showing huemul morphology to coincide withother cervids rather than the commonly implied homology to rock-climbing ungulates.It thus supports historical evidence of huemul in treeless habitat and reaching theAtlantic coast, which cannot be dismissed as past erroneous observations. Instead,pre- and post-Columbian anthropogenic impacts resulted in huemul displacement fromproductive sites and in survival mainly in remote and marginal refuge areas. The processof range contraction was facilitated by easy hunting of huemul, energetic incentives fromseasonal fat cycles and huemul concentrations, the change from hunting-gathering toa mobile equestrian economy, and colonization with livestock. However, areas usedpresently by huemul, as supposed mountain specialists, are also used by wild anddomestic ungulates that clearly are not considered mountain specialists, whereas theonly other Hippocamelus successfully uses areas homologous to tree-less Patagonia.Rigid application of modern habitat usage to infer past habitat use and ignoring historicextra-Andean accounts is unwarranted; these conclusions reached by the HTF indicatenew opportunities for recovery efforts by considering morphological and historicalevidence. For instance, reintroductions to other portions of the landscape used formerlyby huemul, which tend to be more productive sites than those currently occupied bymany huemul groups, would present a promising avenue.Keywords: Adaptation, Andes mountains, appendicular morphology, biogeography,Hippocamelus bisulcus, historical condition, human influence, range contractions,skeletal ratios.IntroductionIn recognition of the urgency of the crisis regarding the EndangeredPatagonian Huemul Deer Hippocamelus bisulcus, the Huemul Task Force(HTF) was formed within the IUCN-SSC to create another tool to providerecommendations and guidelines based on sound scientific informationthrough which the recovery of Huemul can be achieved. Aside fromassisting to determine the current status of Huemul and review theexisting knowledge base, the aim is to identify scientifically acceptablemethodology appropriate for the species’ recovery.Although Diaz (1993) showed already then how history erroneously‘led to the assumption that the Huemul was a deer of the mountains andthat it had always inhabited areas in proximity to rugged topography’, theimportance of this fact has remained largely unrecognized, and remnantOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADAbbreviations: HTF - Huemul Task Force; IUCN - International Union for Conservationof Nature; SSC - Species Survival Commission3302Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–3311

Reassessment of Huemulpopulations in mountain sites are commonly interpretedto be due to Huemul being particularly adapted to suchsites, which thus supposedly represent prime habitatfor the species. Moreover, Huemul being a mountaindeer is often reiterated and supported by referencingkey paleontological work, a study which, however,was erroneous (see below). Main results of thesehistoric influences are 3-fold, by fomenting persistingclaims that: (i) Huemul are exclusively a mountaindeer, specialized to rugged terrain; (ii) that theirnatural range are the Andes mountains, as evidencedby the current relict distribution; and (iii) that the fewhistoric accounts of extra-Andean presence were thuserroneous, or unimportant outliers. As interpretationsof the biology and ecology of Huemul play a mayorrole in conservation strategies, the HTF workedsystematically through available evidence to evaluatecommon depictions of this species.MethodsBeginning in June of 2008, a diversity of datafrom various published and unpublished sources wereanalyzed to address the questions if Huemul specificallyis a mountain deer, and if historic reports of extra-Andean Huemul can legitimately and universally bedismissed as erroneous observations of past naturalists.The HTF formulated several conclusions below.Results and Discussion1. Huemul as mountain deerEarly European explorers and naturalists describedHuemul as stocky, massive and short-legged deer ofmountains, comparing them to Ibex Capra ibex andChamois Rupicapra rupicapra in their homeland (e.g.,Krieg 1925; Kurten 1979). They assumed Huemul tobe a mountain deer, just as was the interpretation forIbex and Chamois at that time, ungulates which by thenwere mainly surviving in remote alpine areas. Similarly,early North American workers compared Huemul toMountain Sheep Ovis canadensis and Mountain GoatsOreamnos americanus (e.g., Krieg 1925; Frers 1969).More recent authors, often referring to these earlywritings, make similar statements. However, earlywritings about Huemul generally already reportedHuemul Task Forcetheir rareness, disappearance or near extinction (e.g.,Philippi 1857; Gigoux 1929), and references to stockyand short-legged Huemul were casual remarks madeabout deer found mainly in refuge areas. Moreover,behavior like the aggressive horseshoe stance (Cowan& Geist 1961) and thick long hair (Image 1) dissimulatestockiness by distorting body shape (reviewed inFlueck & Smith-Flueck 2011).A new fossil of North American cervid Navahoceroswas described by Kurten (1975) as having ‘highlyunusual adaptive characters’ among cervids,interpreted as extreme adaptations to mountains, andresulting in its common name ‘mountain deer’. Heexplicitly compared it to alpine Chamois and Ibex, andconsidered Hippocamelus as related to his fossil. Eventhough his fossil species has since been shown to be aconstruct and declared a ‘nomen nudum’ (Morejohn &Dailey 2004), this relationship is still cited in arguingthat Huemul is a mountain deer. The only comparativeosteological analysis on leg morphology of Huemuland 12 other ungulates revealed that Huemul cannotbe associated with rock climbing species. Althoughintraspecific proportional leg length is influencedby ecogeography, nutrition, physiology and factorsaffecting exercise, with variances of up to 70% in betterstudied cervids, Huemul morphology does not overlapwith rock climbing species previously consideredanalogous, but falls within the range of other cervids(Flueck & Smith-Flueck 2011).Position about Huemul not being a mountain deer,adopted by the HTF in 2011:1. Early historical descriptions of Huemulas short-legged mountain deer comparable to Ibex,Chamois, Bighorn Sheep, or Mountain Goats wereonly casual comments. The descriptions likelyresulted from thick hair coats (7–9 cm hair length) andthe behavior of using the horseshoe posture.2. Kurten’s technical paleontological paper(1975) established Navahoceros as a mountain deercomparable to Ibex and Chamois: Navahoceros hasbeen shown to be a ‘nomen nudum’ (as was concludedearlier for Kurten’s Stilt-legged Deer, Sangamona).Kurten’s referring to Hippocamelus as related to theancestral Navahoceros (only differing by having two[erroneous], instead of three antler tines), has beenrejected based on revising all bones and assembledskeletons labeled as Navahoceros, which wereconfirmed to be Odocoileus (Morejohn & DaileyJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–33113303

Reassessment of HuemulHuemul Task ForceImage 1. (a) The 7–9-cm-thick hair coat is best appreciated when being shed. Note in the upper and lower left photos thatthe diameter of the upper neck is substantially less than further down in the unshed portion. (b) The aggressive stance ofhuemul at close range, known as the horseshoe posture.2004).3. The morphometric analysis of completeleg assemblies from Huemul, then compared toseveral other species, shows that Huemul completelydiffer from ungulates considered rock climbers.Furthermore, intraspecific variation in proportionalleg length—largely due to ecogeographical rules andnutritional and physiological limitations—is up to70% and results in populations of Rangifer and evenO. virginianus having much shorter legs (by 14%)than the Huemul sample.4. The nutritional ecology and climatic andtopographic features of localities where Huemulcurrently remain indicate that leg proportions fromthese sites would be at the low end of the range ofvariations for Huemul: irrespectively, these proportionsclearly fall within the range of other cervids (Image2). Taruca (H. antisensis)—the only sister species toHuemul—utilizes some forest types, but is currentlymainly found in treeless grasslands with high affinityto Patagonian grasslands, coexisting with severalcamelid species.2. Past distribution of HuemulThe pre-Columbian distribution of Huemul has itsroots in founding stock, likely of the Odocoileus line(Morejohn & Dailey 2004), which dispersed throughthe Panama land bridge during the Great AmericanInterchange. Having to pass this equatorial filter ofcontinuous savanna habitat, succeeding species weregeneralists and predominantly savanna-adapted (Webb1978). As reviewed in Flueck & Smith-Flueck (2012),Hippocamelus were established by the Pleistocene,having dispersed south on the eastern side of the Andesthrough continuous savanna habitat. Several periodsof glaciation kept ancestral Hippocamelus repeatedlyaway from the Andes, and fossils are even known as farnortheast as 8 0 9’S & 36 0 22’W in the most eastern tipof Brazil, and from the plains of Argentina, Uruguayand southeastern Brasil.3304Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–3311

Reassessment of HuemulHuemul Task ForceImage 2. Body shapes of several extant Huemul that are not in an alert stance and with summer coat.During glacial periods, the Andes were coveredwith ice even to near the equator, and a continuoussheet covered the mountains from 33–56 0 S duringthe last glacial maximum. Glaciers south of 42 0 Sdipped into the Pacific, overlaid the Andes 1600–1800m thick, and reached hundreds of kilometers intoeastern Patagonian plains where only treeless habitatexisted, with Patagonia-like grasslands reaching wayinto Brazil, and much of South America covered bysavannah and grasslands. Moreover, the sea level wasabout 120m lower and the Atlantic coastline located300km or more to the east of the present coastlinein some latitudes, which greatly extended the flatpaleosteppe region eastwards (e.g., Marshall 1988;Clapperton 1993; Markgraf & Kenny 1997).During glaciations, Hippocamelus thus persistedin eastern treeless lowlands reaching the plains ofUruguay, northern Argentina and Brazil. As mixedfeeders, Huemul can incorporate notable amounts ofgrass in the diet. Furthermore, besides Graminae,Patagonian steppes contain large components ofshrubs, maintain important green grass productionthroughout winter, and deer are known to make muchuse of seed heads, which further corroborates past andeven historic distributions of Huemul in non-forestedhabitats. Once eastern foothill regions became glacierfree,Huemul were able to reach Andean habitat andwhen deglaciation allowed for it, eventually to crossthe Andes. Faunal exchanges from the east wereforemost across low Andean passes and explain theoccurrence of late Pleistocene Huemul in Chile as farnorthwest as 30 0 S by the Pacific coast (e.g., Ochsenius1985; Moreno et al. 1994). With the last glacialretreat, forests spread from few western refuges, andeventually covered the southern Andes again, reachingtheir current extent only 2–3000 ya.Nomadic hunter-gatherers arriving in the southernAndes with the last interglacial period would havehad some influence on local distribution of Huemul.However, in northern and central Chile, humanadopted sessile and agricultural lifestyles long beforearrival of the Spanish, reaching very high densities,completely changing habitat through slash and burn,and regionally extirpating several species includingHuemul and Pudu Deer Pudu puda. Further south,humans became established mainly along the Pacificcoast and focused on marine resources. Consequently,early explorers still found coastal areas abundantwith Huemul. East of the Andes, Huemul then alsoexisted in zones between the Andean foothills andthe Patagonian mesas, still regularly occurring in flatgrasslands about 120km east of the Andes, and alreadymore rarely, up to another 140km further east. Severalreports show this species to have reached the Atlanticcoast (e.g., MacDouall 1833; Moreno 1899).The Spanish arrival resulted in highly significantJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–33113305

Reassessment of Huemulchanges brought about by the introduction of horses,which created an equestrian lifestyle for native peopleand profoundly changed their economies. Liberatedin Buenos Aires, feral horses already reached theStrait of Magellan by 1580. Livestock also becameferal immediately and soon roamed by the millions.Darwin (1839) found that native people knew howto use knives, forks, spoons and relished sugar, andmost of the men spoke some English and Spanish. Hefurther noted that these natives travelled up to 750kminland during summer to hunt in the foothills, eachman having 6–7 horses. Native tribes dominated theregion for some 300 years until displaced by wars,followed by the colonization of Patagonia with fencingand ranching occurring rapidly throughout the region,and with over 47% of Patagonian forests burnt before1914 (e.g., Willis 1914).As a result of the above-mentioned history, thefirst early writings were posterior to significantanthropogenic changes in the distribution of Huemul,with explorers therefore largely unaware of previoushistory. Their descriptions of Huemul often were fromremnant populations living in remote and inaccessibleplaces. Subsequent naturalists found an even morereduced distribution, but as locations coincided withthe few early accounts, it led to dogmatic descriptions.Thus, decades have gone by further ingraining thenotion that Huemul are exclusively of Andean forestsand not part of lowland central Chile; specially adaptedto precipitous rocky terrain, and forest habitats ofthe Andes; a Mountain Deer living above tree line;only living between 1300–1700 m or high elevationmountains; or as preferring steep, rocky, north-facingslopes. Preference to the high Andes, principally nearthe international border along the continental divide,was considered explicitly to be due to the conditionsin that area being the most favorable to Huemul (e.g.,Osgood 1943).The fact that native people may have influencedHuemul distribution, including after the increase inmobility due to horses, has been discounted basedon the argument that Huemul were energeticallyuninteresting. However, dissectable fat of deercontains up to 47% of total energy content, whereasmarrow fat adds only 1% more, explaining why huntergatherersfocus on deer during the autumn/winter peakof fat (e.g., Thomas & Toweill 1982; Lipo 2007). Thishas been ignored when claiming that hunter-gatherersHuemul Task Forcewould not have used an animal so lean as the Huemul,this reasoning being based only on marrow fat. Incontrast, while butchering, natives of northern NorthAmerica consumed dissectable fat and transportedremaining bones for marrow and tallow extractionat camp, just as documented for Patagonian huntergatherers:but the few bone remains found in oldshelters only provide a partial picture. It is erroneousto ignore that professional hunter-gatherers wouldcertainly have taken advantage of easy accessiblefat which presents >1200% more energy contentthan that obtained from bones. Hunter-gatherers,commonly moving according to seasonal movementsof prey, covering distances up to 150km for huntingparticularly in autumn and early winter, best explainedlogistical mobility in low-density hunter-gatherers innorthern environments. From hunting camps, groupsof young men would make roundtrips of >100km inabout three days, being able to portray detailed mapscovering 240,000km 2 and animal movements within.Deer being preferred, a temporary camp would remainif there were animals within 50km. Taking this inaccount when considering historic reports of winterconcentrations of Huemul, foraging conditions in thepre-Colombian era were likely even superior to historictimes in terms of significance to hunter-gatherers.Borrero (2008) acknowledged that so far surveys inPatagonia had been biased, being focused on cavesthat represent permanent sites. Transient huntingcamps and movements are thus under-represented anddifficult to document anyway.Position about the past distribution of Huemul, adoptedby the HTF in 2011:1. Likely it was Odocoileus lucasi (viz.,Navahocerus nomen nudum) dispersing through thePanama land bridge, savanna-adapted by necessity viathat equatorial filter, and giving rise to Hippocamelus.2. Glaciations prevented the continuous useof Andean highlands and the Pacific side: duringglaciations, Patagonia-type habitat, and fossilHippocamelus reached into northeastern Brazil;Patagonia was twice the current size, as the Atlanticcoast line was hundreds of kilometers further east dueto much lower sea levels.3. Dispersal and colonization likely occurredalong the eastern fringe of the cordillera and a coastalroute (e.g., Marshall 1988). Similarly, bighorn3306Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–3311

Reassessment of Huemulsheep remained in grassland and steppe areas duringglaciation, then followed as glaciers retreated;colonization is considered to have likely occurredalong cordillera going south, along glacial margins inhabitats like tundra and taiga (Geist 1985).4. After the last glaciation, forests spread fromPacific refuges and covered the southern Andes again,reaching their current extent only 2–3000 ya. Onceice-free, low passes allowed Huemul to enter fromthe east and to populate landscapes also west of theAndes.5. Humans arrived with the last interglacial period,about 10-12000 ya in the southern Andes. Pre-Columbian hunter-gatherers likely had local impactson Huemul distribution based on optimal foragingamong studied hunter-gatherers (including behaviorof Patagonian natives regarding Guanaco Lamaguanicoe), seasonal fat cycle in Huemul, easinessto hunt Huemul in autumn/winter. Pre-Columbiansessile natives in central Chile exterminated localfauna including cervids like pudu and Huemul.6. Post-Columbian natives became equestrian,focusing on feral domestic livestock and nativeungulates. Patagonians traveled up to 750km to huntin eastern ecotone and foothills, burning extensivelandscapes. Similarly on the Chilean side, largenumbers of livestock and equestrian people displacedHuemul such that early on Huemul were consideredrare and restricted to steep remote mountain areas(except in southern distant Fiord areas).7. After 300 years of dominance, the natives onthe eastern side of Andes were subdued and a waveof fencing and ranching went through Patagonia, withheavy impact on the few Huemul remaining on thoselands.8. Due to pre- and post-Columbian events, the firstwritings were posterior to significant anthropogenicchanges in Huemul distribution, with descriptionsfrom remnant Huemul populations living mainly inremote and inaccessible places. Similarly for desertbighorn sheep, rather than becoming a relict speciescreated by post-pleistocene ecological changes, theyhave become secondary relicts with small, isolatedpopulations created by the impact of Europeansettlement as early as 1540. The overall result wasthe extirpation of many populations of bighorn and thecreation of smaller, isolated herds, prone to extinction(McCutchen 1982).Huemul Task Force9. As a result of pre- and post-Columbian events,there are few historic documents of Huemul stillexisting in extra-Andean landscapes, however:- there were still several reports about large groupsin traditional wintering areas, i.e. groups of 100 ormore- today mainly forked antlers occur, yet thereare several reports of 4 and 5 point antlers, i.e. priorhabitat sites were superior to extant sites (the newestrediscovery of this fact: de la Croix 1937)- besides thorough reviews by Diaz (1993, 2000)there are several newly discovered sources includingphotos of hunted Huemul, with distances from theAndes at 120km, 200km, 260km, 270km, and all theway to the Atlantic coast (Image 3).Note: there are several lines of evidence that Huemulalso occurred in Tierra del Fuego (see Flueck & Smith-Flueck 2012).ConclusionsThe few historic accounts still documentingpresence of Huemul in the eastern treeless lowlands,indicate that Huemul were well suited to exploitthose areas. This information cannot be dismisseddue to its relevance, similarly as had been shownfor Chamois and Ibex. By avoiding the applicationof analogies based only on the present situation, butbeginning to use comparative morphometry and thepast to understand the presence, the repeated fallacyof simply imposing the present on the past will beomitted. The empirical comparisons showed Huemulleg morphology to fall well within that of other cervidsand can be expected to vary substantially if they were tolive in habitats formerly used. It supports the evidencethat Huemul existed in treeless habitat and colonizedAndean forests and higher altitudes secondarily, andhabitat breadth of Huemul is thus more like that foundin other closely related Odocoilines, and moreover,coincides with habitat use by the only congeneric, thetaruca. Although Huemul can use forests exclusively,they can also thrive in ecotone, and (previously) ingrasslands, steppe, and deserts (like Odocoilines, Ibex,Bighorn Sheep, Red Deer Cervus elaphus, Guanaco).Additionally, unspotted Hippocamelus fawns alsopoint to an origin in non-forested areas, which stillJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–33113307

Reassessment of HuemulHuemul Task ForceabcdeImage 3. Huemul habitat far from forests and in flat or rolling landscapes. (a) Huemul in steppe, approached by gaucho,from Onelli 1904. (b) Huemul photographed in the 1920s by A. Grosse. (c,d) Princeton expeditions, late 1800s, huntinghuemul as far as 200km from forests, from Hatcher 1903. (e) Extant Huemul in periglacial Pacific coast, old moraines, andflat wide valley bottoms. (note: open areas used during midday hours)presents the principal habitat use by H. antisensis.Moreover, even small cervids thrive exclusively intreeless grasslands, like Pampas Deer (Ozotocerosbezoarticus Perez et al., 2008) or Roe Deer (Capreoluscapreolus Abbas et al., 2012), which show extensivedigestive plasticity via behavioral and morphologicaladaptations.The seasonal fat cycle and congregations likelymade Huemul a prime candidate for hunter-gatherers,who would have therefore influenced their distributionand density. The subsequent equestrian mobility ofnatives and later colonists further displaced Huemul3308Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–3311

Reassessment of Huemulfrom traditional valleys and winter ranges. Severalother ungulates had mainly lost their low elevationhabitats from anthropogenic pressures and rangecontraction allowed them to persist only in marginalperipherical habitat, concentrated at high elevationsor otherwise inaccessible sites (Channell & Lomolino2000; Laliberte & Ripple 2004). Thus, paleoecology,zoogeography, and history of land use in southern LatinAmerica indicate that Huemul exclusively remainingin high mountains are secondary relicts created bypost-Columbian anthropogenic impacts. The presenceof Huemul right into historic times in grasslands andsteppe areas is likely of more importance to Huemulconservation than hitherto acknowledged.Although Huemul presently still use flat areas,they did more so in the past (like Odocoilines,Bighorn Sheep, Guanaco, but unlike Mountain Goat,Ibex). The habitat types used by Huemul in recenttimes and resulting in the colloquial description asmountain deer, are not preventing the use of theseareas by species not considered mountain specialists,like Guanaco, Wild Boar Sus scrofa, Red Deer, FallowDeer Dama dama, cattle (specially feral ones), goats,sheep, and horses. The habitat types used by Huemulhistorically are also used by these same species above.Taruca, considered by several authors osteologicallyindistinguishable from Huemul and suggested torepresent two subspecies, occur in areas used bycamelids (vicuña, guanaco, llamas, alpacas), White-Tailed Deer Odocoileus virginianus, domestic sheep,cattle, horses, and mules. Taruca occur in the colddesert ‘puna’, which includes large tracks of plains(altiplano): nearly every one of its plant genera alsooccurs in the Patagonia steppe (Fernández & Busso1997). Lastly, taruca also occur in ecotone and forests(still now, but more so in the past).The rigid application of modern Huemul habitatusage to infer past habitat use and ignoring historicextra-Andean accounts as erroneous or abnormaloutliers is unwarranted. The conclusions reached bythe HTF indicate new opportunities for recovery effortsby considering morphological and historical evidence.For instance, reintroductions to other portions of thelandscape used formerly by Huemul, which tend to bemore productive sites than those currently occupiedby many Huemul groups, would present a promisingavenue (see IUCN 2012 in prep.: Guidelines forReintroductions and other Conservation Translocations.Huemul Task ForceIUCN/SSC Reintroduction and Invasive SpeciesSpecialist Groups. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland).Although adopting a uniform conservation programover a large geographical area is attractive to policymakersand conservation planners, the large range ofpast geographical and ecological sites used by Huemulindicate that conservation programs could benefit frombroadening strategies accordingly.ReferencesAbbas, F., D. Picot, J. Merlet, B. Cargnelutti, B. Lourtet, J.Angibault, T. Daufresne, S. Aulagnier & H. Verheyden(2012). A typical browser, the roe deer, may consumesubstantial quantities of grasses in open landscapes.European Journal of Wildlife Research DOI 10.1007/s10344-012-0648-9.Borrero, L.A. (2008). Early occupations in the southern cone,pp. 59–77. In: Silverman H. & W. Isbell (eds.). Handbookof South American Archaeology. Springer, New York.Channell, R. & M.V. Lomolino (2000). Dynamicsbiogeography and conservation of endangered species.Nature 403: 84–86.Clapperton, C.M. (1993). Nature of environmentalchanges in South America at the Last Glacial Maximum.Palaeogeography, Paleoclimatology, Palaeoecology 101:189–208.Cowan, I.McT. & V. Geist (1961). Aggressive behavior indeer of the genus Odocoileus. Journal of Mammalogy 42:522–526.Darwin, C. (1839). Narratives of the Surveying Voyages ofthe Adventure and Beagle. Volume III. Henry Colburn:London.de la Croix, P.M. (1937). El huemul. Caras y Caretas (BuenosAires) 40(2001): 117.Díaz, N.I. (1993). Changes in the range distribution ofHippocamelus bisulcus in Patagonia. Zeitschrift fürSäugetierkunde 58: 344–351.Díaz, N.I. (2000). The Huemul (Hippocamelus bisulcusMolina, 1782): A historical perspective, pp. 1–31. In: Díaz,N.I. & J.M. Smith-Flueck (eds.) The Patagonian Huemul.A Mysterious Deer on The Brink of Extinction. Literature ofLatin America: Buenos Aires.Fernández, O.A. & C.A. Busso (1997). Arid and semi-aridrangelands: two thirds of Argentina, pp. 41–60. In: Arnalds,O. & S. Archer (eds.) Proceedings from an InternationalWorkshop in Iceland. Rala Report no. 200. AgriculturalResearch Institute: Reykjavik, Iceland.Flueck, W.T. & J.M. Smith-Flueck (2011). Osteologicalcomparisons of appendicular skeletons: a case studyon Patagonian Huemul Deer and its implications forconservation. Animal Production Science 51: 327–339.Flueck, W.T. & J.M. Smith-Flueck (2012). Huemul heresies:Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–33113309

Reassessment of Huemulbeliefs in search of supporting data. 1. Historical andzooarcheological considerations. Animal ProductionScience 52: 685–693.Frers, K.A. (1969). Das Waidwerk und die autochthonenCerviden in Argentinien, pp. 25–31. In: Vogel, C.A.(ed.) Parque Diana. Stefan Schwarz Verlag: München,Germany.Geist, V. (1985). On pleistocene bighorn sheep: some problemsof adaption, and relevance to today’s American megafauna.Wildlife Society Bulletin 13(3): 351–359.Gigoux, E.E. (1929). El huemul. Revista Chilena de HistoriaNatural 23: 573–82.Grosse, A. (1949). El huemul - ciervo de los Andes y emblemadel escudo Chileno. Condor (Revista Chileno Alemana) 12:10–12.Hatcher, J.B. (1903). Reports of the Princeton Universityexpeditions to Patagonia, 1896–1899. Vol. I: Narrativeof the Expeditions. Geography of Southern Patagonia. E.Schweizerbart’sche Verlagshandlung: Stuttgart.Krieg, H. (1925). Biologische Reisestudien in Südamerika. V.Die chilenischen Hirsche. Zeitschrift für Morphologie undOekologie der Tiere 4: 585–97.Kurten, B. (1975). A new Pleistocene genus of Americanmountain deer. Journal of Mammalogy 56: 507–508.Kurten, B. (1979). A stilt-legged deer Sangamona of the North-American Pleistocene. Boreas 8: 313–321.Laliberte, A.S. & W.J. Ripple (2004). Range contractions ofNorth American carnivores and ungulates. BioScience 54:123–138.Lipo, K.D. (2007). Evolutionary foraging models inzooarchaeological analysis: Recent applications and futurechallenges. Journal of Archeological Research 15: 143–189.MacDouall, J. (1833). Narratives of A Voyage to Patagoniaand Terra del Fuego. Renshaw and Rush, London, 320pp.Markgraf, V. & R. Kenny (1997). Character of rapidvegetation and climate change during the late-Glacialin southernmost South America, pp. 81–90. In: Huntley,B. (ed.) Past and Future Rapid Environmental Changes:Huemul Task ForceSpatial and Evolutionary Responses to terrestrial Biota.Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Marshall, L.G. (1988). Land Mammals and the Great AmericanInterchange. American Scientist 76: 380–388.McCutchen, H.E. (1981). Desert Bighorn Zoogeographyand Adaptation in Relation to Historic Land Use. WildlifeSociety Bulletin 9(3): 171–179.Morejohn, G.V. & D.C. Dailey (2004). The identity andpostcranial osteology of Odocoileus lucasi (Hay) 1927.Sierra College Natural History Museum Bulletin 1: 1–54.Moreno, P.I., C. Villagran, P.A. Marquet & L.G. Marshall(1994). Quaternary paleobiogeography of northern andcentral Chile. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 67:487–502.Moreno, F.P. (1899). Explorations in Patagonia. TheGeographical Journal 14: 241–269.Ochsenius, C. (1985). Pleniglacial Desertization, large-animalmass extinction and Pleistocene-Holocene boundary inSouth America. Revista de Geografía Norte Grande 12:35–47.Onelli, C. (1904). Trepando los Andes. Companía Sud-Americana de Billetes de Banco: Buenos Aires, 297pp.Osgood, W.H. (1943). The mammals of Chile. Field MuseumNatural History, Zoological Series 30: 1–268.Perez, W., M. Clauss & R. Ungerfeld (2008). Observationson the macroscopic anatomy of the intestinal tract andits mesenteric folds in the Pampas Deer (Ozotocerosbezoarticus, Linnaeus 1758). Anatomia, Histologia andEmbryologia 37: 317–321.Philippi, R.A. (1857). Über den Guemul von Molina. Archivfür Naturgeschichte 23: 135–136.Thomas, J.W. & D.E. Toweill (1982). Elk of North America.Stackpole Books: Harrisburg, PA, 698pp.Webb, S.D. (1978). A history of savanna vertebrates in the NewWorld. Part II: South America and the Great Interchange.Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 9:393–426.Willis, B. (1914). El norte de la Patagonia. Ministerio de ObrasPublicas: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 500pp.Spanish Abstract: Con el objeto de contribuir a la conservación del huemul Patagónico (Hippocamelus bisulcus) el grupo de trabajo,Huemul Task Force (HTF), realizó una revisión de la información sobre la morfología apendicular, paleobiogeografía y distribuciónhistórica del huemul como factores potencialmente relevantes en los esfuerzos de recuperación de la especie. La creencia tradicionalde que el huemul es un especialista de los hábitats de montaña andinos fue refutada por la evidencia empírica de los análisismorfológicos. La anatomía apendicular del huemul es similar a la de otros cérvidos y difiere de las especializaciones implicadaspara la escalada en roca de otros ungulados. Por lo tanto, se apoya la evidencia histórica del huemul en un hábitat sin árboles comola estepa Patagónica. Su presencia histórica en la costa atlántica no puede ser considerada como observaciones erróneas. En sulugar, hay que entender que impactos antropogénicos pre y post colombinos dieron como resultado el desplazamiento de huemuldesde los sitios más productivos a sitios de supervivencia, sobre todo en las áreas de refugio remotas y marginales. El proceso decontracción de su rango geográfico se vió facilitado por la caza fácil, por los incentivos energéticos de los ciclos estacionales delas reservas corporales de grasa, por las concentraciones numéricas de huemul, por el cambio de la economía cazador-recolectora una economía ecuestre móvil, y por la colonización con introducción de ganado doméstico. Las áreas de montaña actualmenteutilizadas por el huemul, supuesto especialista de estos hábitats, también son ocupadas por ungulados domésticos, que claramenteno son especialistas en montaña. Además, el único otro miembro de Hippocamelus utiliza con éxito las áreas homólogos a la región.La aplicación rígida del uso del hábitat moderno para inferir el uso del hábitat pasado, ignorando el hábitat histórico extra-andinoes injustificada. Estas conclusiones alcanzadas por el HTF indican nuevas oportunidades para los esfuerzos de recuperación delhuemul, apoyadas por la combinación de elementos morfológicos e históricos. Por ejemplo, la reintroducción a otros sectores delpaisaje utilizado anteriormente por el huemul, que tienden a ser sitios más productivos que los actualmente ocupados por muchosgrupos de huemules, presentaría una vía prometedora.3310Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–3311

Reassessment of HuemulHuemul Task Force* Individual authors: contact detailsEduardo G. AisenLab. Theriogenology, Universidad Nacional delComahue, IDEPA (CONICET-UNCo), c.c. 858303 Cinco Saltos, Rio NegroEmail: eduardoaisen@hotmail.comPatricia Black de DecimaInstituto Miguel Lillo, Miguel Lillo 205, 4000San Miguel de Tucuman, ArgentinaEmail: patriciablack_decima@hotmail.com,pblack@csnat.unt.edu.arWerner FlueckNational Council of Scientific and TechnologicalResearch (CONICET), Buenos Aires, SwissTropical and Public Health Institute, UniversityBasel, C.C. 592, 8400 Bariloche, ArgentinaEmail: werner.flueck@unibas.chJo Anne Smith-FlueckInstitute of Natural Resources Analysis -Patagonia, Universidad Atlantida Argentina,C.C. 592, 8400 Bariloche, ArgentinaEmail: j.smith@deerlab.org (correspondingauthor)Norberto TomasParque Nacional Calilegua, San Lorenzo s/nº4514 Calilegua, Jujuy, ArgentinaEmail: jnorbertotomas@yahoo.com.ar,ntomas@apn.gov.arGladys GarayParaguaya 126, Barrio San Miguel, PuntaArenas, ChileEmail: gladysenviaje@yahoo.comJaime E. JiménezUniversity of North Texas, 1155 Union CircleDenton, Texas 76203-5017, USAOmora Ethnobotanical Park, Universidad deMagallanes, Puerto Williams, ChileEmail: jaime.jimenez@unt.eduFernando VidalFundación Huilo-Huilo, Vitacura 2909 Of. 1112Las Condes, Santiago, ChileEmail: fauna.andina@gmail.comValerius GeistPO Box 1294, Station A, Port Alberni, BC, V9Y7M2, CanadaEmail: kendulf@shaw.caZygmunt GizejewskiPolish Academy of Sciences, Institute ofAnimal Reproduction and Food Research,Pl-10-747 Olsztyn, PolandEmail: z.gizejewski@pan.olsztyn.plJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3302–33113311

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3312–3318Western GhatsSpecial SeriesMetazoan community composition in tree hole aquatichabitats of Silent Valley National Park and New AmarambalamReserve Forest of the Western Ghats, IndiaK.A. Nishadh 1,2,3 & K.S. Anoop Das 1,21Centre for Conservation Ecology, Department of Zoology, M.E.S. Mampad College, Malappuram, Kerala 676542, India2Wildlife Research and Conservation Trust, Anupallavi, Chungathara P.O., Malappuram, Kerala 679334, India3Environmental Impact Assessment Division,Sálim Ali Center for Ornithology and Natural History, Anaikatty P.O, Coimbatore TamilNadu 641108, IndiaEmail: 1 nishadhka@gmail.com, 2 dasksa@gmail.com (corresponding author)Phytotelmata, plant held aquatic habitats in treeholes are one of the important classes of aquaticecosystems (Kitching 2000). These habitats areformed by the stagnation of rain water in cavities ordepression of trees which make them one of the widelydistributed and most abundant fresh water ‘hangingaquaria’ in forested woodlands (Kitching 1971). WellDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: K.G. SivaramakrishnanManuscript details:Ms # o3197Received 11 May 2011Final received 13 August 2012Finally accepted 03 October 2012Citation: Nishadh, K.A. & K.S.A. Das (2012). Metazoan communitycomposition in tree hole aquatic habitats of Silent Valley National Park andNew Amarambalam Reserve Forest of the Western Ghats, India. Journalof Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3312–3318.Copyright: © K.A. Nishadh & K.S. Anoop Das 2012. Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this articlein any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution byproviding adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: The authors extend gratitude to Drs. V.S. Vijayan,L. Vijayan, R. Sankaran, P.A. Azeez, T.V. Sajeev, G. Mathew, J.K Hill,P. Balakrishnan, P. Pramod, B. Acharya and P.R. Arun for their inspiringdiscussions during the project. Thanks to O.P. Abdurahiman, K.Seedikkoya, K.K. Abida and R. Dhanya for their support. We are indebtedto the comments of the anonymous reviewers, which have enriched themanuscript. We thank the Department of Forests and Wildlife, Kerala, forpermissions and support to conduct this study. We thank Idea Wild, USA,for equipment grant. Funding was provided by the Critical EcosystemPartnership Fund under the Western Ghats Small Grant through ATREE.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F117E9D6-97EC-4A27-8F2F-F1E27B9E4C9FOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADAbstract: In a study of the metazoan community compositionin tree hole aquatic habitat of a tropical rainforest, Silent ValleyNational Park, and the adjacent moist deciduous forest, NewAmarambalam Reserve Forest, of the Western Ghats, 28different species were recorded from 150 tree hole aquatichabitats with an average of 3–5 species per tree hole. Most ofthe recorded organisms (96.8%) belong to Odonata (dragonfliesand damselflies), Heteroptera (bugs), Diptera (flies), Coleoptera(beetles) and Trichoptera (caddisflies). The study reports the firstrecord of toe-winged beetle larvae (Ptilodactylidae) in a tree holeaquatic habitat. The most significant observation is the prolificoccurrence of trichopteran larvae as the second most abundanttaxa in tree holes of Silent Valley National Park, and this standsas the first comprehensive record of the entire order in the habitatstudied. The study upholds the importance of less exploredmicrohabitats in the Western Ghats region in terms of sustainingunique community composition in the most delicate and extremehabitat conditions. It also puts forward important ecologicalresearch questions on biodiversity ecosystem functionality whichcould impart important lessons for managing and conserving thediminishing tropical evergreen forests which are significant forthese unique habitats.Keywords: Ecosystem experimental tool, microcosm,phytotelmata, Scritidae, tree cavities, Trichoptera.defined boundaries, confined size and extreme physiochemicalconditions make these habitats colonizedby specialized communities starting from autotrophicfungi to predaceous amphibians (Yanoviak 1999). Ithas attracted immense fascination from naturalistsThis article forms part of a special series on the Western Ghats of India,disseminating the results of work supported by the Critical EcosystemPartnership Fund (CEPF), a joint initiative of l’Agence Française deDéveloppement, Conservation International, the Global EnvironmentFacility, the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and theWorld Bank. A fundamental goal of CEPF is to ensure civil societyis engaged in biodiversity conservation. Implementation of the CEPFinvestment program in the Western Ghats is led and coordinatedby the Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment(ATREE).3312Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3312–3318

Tree hole metazoansand community ecologists due to its canopy aquaticcommunity, wide spatial and replicable distributionand extension of experimental studies on it (Kitching2001). The physical barriers of a tree hole aquatichabitat sustains discrete communities in it that aremostly subsets of the larger forest ecosystems. Togetherwith those features and methodological advantagefor experimental studies makes them importantexperimental tools in ecology for studying processesand patterns occurring at the level of the community(Srivastava et al. 2004). Epidemiological importanceof these habitats as major breeding grounds for diseasespreading organisms such as mosquitos has furtherattracted the attention of these habitats to medicalentomologists (Jenkins & Carpenter 1946; Maguire1971).Extensive studies were carried out on these habitatsin various parts of the world. But, the knowledge onthe Indian tree hole aquatic habitat and its communitycomposition is meager. In India, apart from the specieslisting and the natural history observations, only afew research efforts have addressed the ecologicalfunctionality and the responses of aquatic insects tospecific ecosystems (Subramanian & Sivaramakrishnan2005). All other studies were of epidemiologicalconcern (Rao et al. 1970; Nagpal & Sharma 1985). Thepresent study, the first of its kind in India, was carriedout to assess the community composition in tree holeaquatic habitats.K.A. Nishadh & K.S.A. DasMaterials and MethodsThe study was carried out in the Silent ValleyNational Park (SVNP) and New Amaramblam ReserveForest (NARF) of the Western Ghats, Kerala fromDecember 2009 to September 2010. This region isclassified as west coast tropical wet evergreen forest,(Champion & Seth 1968; 11 0 03’–11 0 13’N & 76 0 21’–76 0 35’E) and forms a part of the Nilgiri BiosphereReserve (Image 1). The forests of SVNP fall under thecategory of Malabar rainforest realm and the vegetationcomprises mainly of the westcoast tropical evergreenand semievergreen forests (Udvardy 1975; Champion& Seth 1968). The annual mean temperature in theSVNP ranges between 18 0 C and 23 0 C and mean annualprecipitation ranges from 3200–5000 mm between thesections (Table 1). NARF (11 0 26’–11 0 9’N & 75 0 45’–76 0 33’E) is a west coast tropical moist deciduousforest bordering northwest of SVNP. The annual meantemperature in this forest ranges from 21–38 0 C andmean annual precipitation is 2397mm (Das 2008).Survey MethodsIn SVNP tree holes were sampled from three regionsof the park, namely, Sairandhri (n=68), Poochipara(n=34) and Walakkad (n=35) whereas in NARF treeholes were mostly sampled from Panapuzha (n=13).Image 1. The sampling locations in Silent Valley National Park and New Amarambalam Reserve ForestJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3312–33183313

Tree hole metazoansK.A. Nishadh & K.S.A. DasTable 1. Details of sampling locations in Silent Valley National Park and New Amarambalam Reserve ForestPlace Location Altitude (m) Habitat matrixSairandhri 11 0 5’33.58”N & 76 0 26’44.61”E 1011–1056 West coast tropical wet evergreen Forest (logged)Poochipara 11 0 6’40.81”N & 76°25’20.81”E 0962–0998 West coast tropical wet evergreen Forest (undisturbed)Walakkad 11 0 10’89”N & 76 0 25’44”E 1160–1175 West coast tropical wet evergreen Forest (undisturbed)Panapuzha 11 0 26’–11 0 9’N & 75 0 45’–76 0 33’E 0600–0675 West coast tropical moist deciduous forestsieves from coarse to finer sieves (cc-500μm sievesize) by holding in a plastic tray. The organisms werecounted and morpho-species preserved in 5% formalin(Yanoviak & Fincke 2005). The collected specimenswere sorted out and identified to possible taxonomiclevel of family/genus following Edmondson (1959),and Subramanian & Sivaramkrishnan (2007).Image 2. Tree hole aquatic habitat and the typicalcommunities residing in it, such as larvae of Trichoptera,Scritidae, Culicidae and a Hemiptera adult. © K.S.A. DasFor every tree hole sampled, structural characteristics ofthe tree hole such as diameter were measured by takingtwo longest hole opening measurements perpendicularto each other (Sota 1998).The variables such as depth, water volume andheight of the tree hole from the ground, girth at breastheight (GBH) of the tree were also measured. Waterfrom the tree hole was extracted by siphoning and thevolume measured using a measuring cylinder. Thecontent of the tree hole such as leaf litter and detrituswere transferred to a tray and thoroughly checkedfor the presence of life forms (Image 2). Thoroughchecks were made with the aid of a flashlight forelusive organisms in cervices present in the tree hole.The water contents were then sieved with successiveResults and DiscussionThe vegetation patterns in SVNP (Manilal 1988;Vajravelu 1990; Das 2008) and NARF (Sharma etal. 2002) are well documented. Most of the treeholes sampled in SVNP were from the tree species,Elaeocarpus tuberculatus, Syzygium cumini, Mesuaferrea, Holigarna arnottiana, Artocarpus heterophyllus,Dysoxylum malabaricum, Hopea parviflora, Myristicadactyloides and Acrocarpus fraxinifolius, whereas inNARF, the tree holes sampled belonged to Mangiferaindica, Stereospermum chelnoids, Homonoia riparia,Tetramales nudiflora and Albizia lebbeck. A majorityof the tree holes were of the ‘pan’ type (80.4%) whichappeared as a depression in the trunk. The remainingtree holes were ‘rot’ type (19.6%) wherein the tree holeswere formed by wreckage in the tree. Altogether, 7505individuals of metazoans were recorded from 150 treehole aquatic habitats. Aquatic insects belonging to theorders Coleoptera (beetles), Diptera (flies), Trichoptera(caddisflies), Heteroptera (bugs), and Odonata(dragonflies and damselflies) together comprised96.8% of the entire collection (Table 2; Image 3). Theremaining 3.2% were the representatives of the taxafrom Dermaptera, Annelida, Collembola, Gastropoda,Diplopoda, Geckonidae (Reptilia) and Anura(Amphibia). Larvae of marsh beetles (Scritidae) werethe most abundant taxa, which occurred in 83.3% ofall the tree holes sampled with an average abundanceof 28.5±56.6 individuals per tree hole at Sairandhri,27.9±42.6 at Poochipara, 20.08±20 at Walakkad and10.84±13.13 at Panapuzha. It was followed by larvaeof Trichoptera (62.6%) with the highest abundance3314Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3312–3318

Tree hole metazoansK.A. Nishadh & K.S.A. DasTable 2. Macro fauna in the tree hole aquatic habitat of Silent Valley National Park and New Amaramblam Reserve Forest. Valuesare mean number of individual taxa per tree hole. Percentage tree hole occupied by particular taxon is in parenthesis.SnoPhylumSairandhri(n=68)SVNPPoochipara(n=34)Walakkad(n=35)NARFPanapuzha(n=13)1 Nematoda - - 0.06 (2.86) -2 Annelida: Oligochaeta 0.07 (7.35) 0.79 (11.76) 0.74 (20.00) -3 Arthropoda: Malacostraca: Oniscidea - - 0.24 (11.43) -4 Decapoda: Gecarcinucidae 0.03 (2.94) - - -5 Arachnida: Araneae 0.09 (8.82) - 0.41 (17.14) -6 Entognatha: Collembola - - 0.26 (14.29) -7 Insecta: Odonata: Anisoptera: Libellulidae 0.12 (8.82) 0.12 (11.76) - 23.07 (0.23)8 Hemiptera 1.76 (16.18) 0.18 (8.82) 0.06 (2.86) 15.38 (0.46)9 Diptera: Tipulidae: Tipulinae 1.13 (41.18) 1.59 (35.29) 1.50 (45.71) 46.15 (1.23)10 Tipulidae sp. 0.43 (22.06) 1.12 (17.65) 0.24 (14.29) 23.07 (0.46)11 Culicidae: Toxoyrinchites sp. 0.15 (8.82) 0.06 (2.94) 0.09 (8.57) 30.76 (0.61)12 Culex sp. 6.85 (33.82) 1.65 (23.53) 0.97 (28.57) 23.07 (1.46)13 Aedes sp. 1.94 (11.76) 1.50 (17.65) 3.12 (20.00) 23.07 (1)14 Chironomidae 0.60 (20.59) 3.06 (41.18) 0.18 (5.71) 23.07 (0.38)15 Ceratopogonidae 0.07 (2.94) 0.24 (11.76) 0.09 (8.57) -16 Syrphidae: Eristalis sp. 0.03 (2.94) - 0.29 (11.43) -17 Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Agabus sp. 0.04 (1.47) 0.03 (2.94) 0.27 (5.71) 15.38 (0.38)18 Hydrophilidae: Helochares sp. 4.18 (50.00) 2.65 (47.06) 4.85 (80.00) -19 Scritidae 28.51 (80.88) 27.94 (94.12) 20.88 (88.57) 84.61 (10.84)20 Ptilodactylidae: Anchytarsus sp. - - - 23.07 (1.3)21 Trichoptera 17.32 (79.41) 7.97 (64.71) 2.09 (60.00) -22 Dermaptera 0.01 (1.47) - 0.03 (2.86) -23 Hymenoptera - 0.26 (5.88) - 0.15 (2.86)24 Blattaria - 0.03 (2.94) - -25 Thysanoptera 0.03 (1.47) 0.03 (2.94) - -26 Mollusca: Gastropoda - - 0.15 (14.29) 7.69 (0.07)2728Chordata: Amphibia: Anura: Microhylidae:Ramanella sp.Reptilia: Squamata: Gekkonidae:Cnemaspis sp.0.99 (16.18) 0.09 (2.94) 0.03 (2.86) 15.38 (3.07)0.03 (2.94) 0.12 (11.76) - -Total taxa 21 19 21 14of 17.3±42.6 individuals at Sairandhri, 7.9±15.3individuals at Poochipara, 2.1±3.7 individuals inWalakkad. Trichoptera was completely absent inthe tree holes sampled at Panapuzha. With regard torichness of taxa, a typical tree hole in SVNP harbors4±1.7 taxa with a range of one to 11 different taxaper tree hole whereas Panapuzha of NARF harbored3.6±1.3 taxa with a range of 1–6 different taxa per treehole. Out of 16 aquatic insect taxa recorded, nine wereDiptera, four Coleoptera and one each of Trichoptera,Heteroptera, and Odonata. About 13 taxa of aquaticinsects present in the tree holes were in the larval stagewhile three taxa belonging to Hydrophilidae, Dytiscidaeof Coleoptera and Heteroptera were in the adult stage.The structural characteristics, community structure,number of taxa and their abundance as well as thenumber of predators and saprophages present in thetree holes are given in Table 3. The saprophagesinclude Scirtidae and Tipulidae. Scirtidae which arecommonly called marsh beetles is the most abundantand highly characteristic group of tree hole aquatichabitat in the study area. It uses its specializedmouth parts to shred the leaf litters and in turn largelyfacilitate the conversion of coarse particulate organicJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3312–33183315

Tree hole metazoansK.A. Nishadh & K.S.A. DasImage 3. Metazon communities in tree hole aquatic habitat. © K.A. Nishadha - Trichoptera; b - Ptilodactylidae; c - Odonata nymph d - Decapoda; e - Syrphidae; f - Scritidamatter (CPOM) into fine particulate organic matter(FPOM). This species is considered to be an importantcommunity structure determining factor in tree holeaquatic habitats (Paradise & Dunson 1997). Therewere about four prominent genera namely Cyphon,Princocyphon, Elodes, and Scrites observed in tree holeaquatic habitats, in which Scrites and Cyphon were themost speciose genera with about 50 species overalldescribed from scritidae family from India (Ruta 2007).Tipulids (Diptera) act as large scale shredders anddecomposers of leaf litter in tree hole aquatic habitats.The primitive structural characteristic and need to keepthe respiratory plastron constantly in contact with airmake them stay nearer the upper level of the watercolumn in the tree hole aquatic habitat preferably inwater-air interfaces. This designates them as one ofthe first processors and decomposers of fresh fallenleaf litter. Two groups of Tipulidae were observedfrom tree holes in the study area, one group with largestructural characteristic larvae belongs to the subfamilyTipulinae and another relatively small size larval groupwhich was unidentified. It was observed that physicalcharacteristics such as depth, water volume of treeholes, and GBH of host tree were highly variable withinsites and between sites. The predator aquatic insecttaxa recorded to three taxa namely Toxyrinchites sp.(Culcidae), Agabus sp. (Dytiscidae), and an anisopterannymph of Odonata. Of these Anisoptera act as the toppredator in the tree hole aquatic habitat (Kitching &Orr 1996). The remaining taxa were saprophagesgrouped into macrosparophages, microsparphagesand filter feeders based on feeding relation on coarseparticulate organic matter, fine particulate organicmatter and dissolved organic matter, respectively.3316Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3312–3318

Tree hole metazoansK.A. Nishadh & K.S.A. DasTable 3. Tree hole habitat characteristics and community structure in various sites of Silent Valley National Park and NewAmarambalam Reserve ForestCharactersWater volume, mlSairandhri(n=68)1,439.29±3,291.69(100–7200)Poochipara(n=34)752.88±953.72 (50–3250)Walakkad(n=35)528.85±1,718.75(20–10000)Panapuzha(n=13)2,189.23±2,253.68(50–6670)Depth, cm 10.69±10.48 (3–74) 17.30±34.82 (2–150) 12.09±7.53 (3–34) 19.69±19.14 (2–70)Height of the hole at rim,cm84.12±62.32 (16–148) 89.67±70.80 (5–300) 91.15±102.29 (5–440) 62.42±63.90 (5–200)GBH of tree, cm 226.08±132.96 (10–400) 299.18±162.73 (25–750) 222.59±408.90 (49–2502) 320.54±467.66 (51–1800)No. of taxa per tree hole 4.04±1.71 (1–9) 4.18±1.45 (2–8) 4.59±1.79 (2–11) 3.62±1.39 (1–6)Abundance of taxa pertree hole64.28±95.24 (1–501) 49.41±58.17 (2–281) 36.44±31.26 (3–152) 21.69±20.55 (3–77)No. of predatory insects 0.16±0.37 (0–1) 0.18±0.39 (0–1) 0.12±0.33 (0–1) 0.69±0.75 (0–2)No. of saprophage insects 3.88±1.58 (1–9) 4.00±1.41 (2–7) 4.47±1.78 (2–11) 2.92±1.04 (1–4)Values are mean+SD, and ranges in parenthesis.Community composition was more similar within thetree hole aquatic habitats of SVNP and highly variablebetween SVNP and NARF (Table 3). Interestingly,aquatic insect taxa such as Trichoptera, Syraphidae andCeratopoginidae were completely absent from NARFand the coleopteran group Ptilodactylidae was absentfrom SVNP tree holes. The feeding relationship ofa community is mainly organized based on detritusfood web in which the saprophage group were mostrepresented in terms of abundance and taxa richness.A notable record in the present study is the prolificoccurrence of order Trichoptera (caddisflies) as thesecond most abundant group in tree hole aquatichabitats of the study area. Two former records on thisorder’s occurrence in tree hole aquatic habitat suggestits rare colonization in the habitat (Barnard 1978;Greeney 2001; Taylor & Ewers 2003). They are casemakers and microsaprophages in nature, mostly seenas browsing on freshly fallen leaf litters. Toe-wingedbeetle larvae (Ptilodactylidae) were recorded only fromtree holes of NARF and this record is considered to bethe first record of this family in tree hole aquatic habitatsstudied elsewhere (Kitching 2000; Greeney 2001).The larval stage Anchytarsus sp. (Ptilodactylidae) wasrecorded, their larval stage lasts up to three years. Theyare macrosaprophagic in nature (Lesage & Harper1976).One family Velidae of Hemiptera was reported fromtree hole aquatic habitats (Yanoviak 1999). In the studyarea Hemipetra was represented by the family Gerridae.These organisms are amphibious in nature, so most ofthe time they were seen skating over the water surfaceand when disturbed sheltered in the tree bark cervices.They prefer tree holes with ample light availabilityand feed on prey available near the water surface,such as spiders and small insects. The report on thisfamily in water-filled bamboo internodes documentedits predacious and territorial behavior compared toother individuals (Kitching 2000). Dytiscidae andHydrophilidae of the order Coleoptera were wellrepresented in tree holes of SVNP. Genus Agabus(Dytiscidae) is a voracious predator both in the adultand larval life stages and is considered as one of thepotential biocontrol agents for mosquito vectors. Theswiftness in mobility and predation makes them one ofthe imperative top community structure determinantsin tree hole aquatic habitats (Kitching 2000). In theadult stage Hydrophilidae act as scavengers and aremostly seen browsing on leaf litters. These beetlesnormally spend their larval stage in damp areas nearwater sources and at this stage they are carnivorous andcannibalistic (Edmondson 1959). Dragonfly (Odonata:Anisoptera) larvae occurring in tree hole aquatichabitats act as top predators. The presence of spoonshapedextensible labia in libellulid dragonflies makesthem most adaptable predators in aquatic habitats.The present study lists many species that were notpreviously recorded from the region. The interaction ofevolutionary radiation and climate change over a timescale of a few million years explains why the moistforests of the world are so highly diverse. Periodsof expansion and contraction of the forest, togetherwith processes of speciation occurring within isolatedpatches, have been described as a ‘species-pump’Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3312–33183317

Tree hole metazoansmechanism (Ananthakrishnan & Sivaramakrishnan(2008). This is a valid explanation accounting forthe increased speciosity and complexity of organismsin food webs in tree holes from tropical rainforestswhen compared with subtropical or temperate forests(Kitching 2000). Future studies should be designedto unravel the intricacies of “processing chaincommensalisms” in tree holes (Ananthakrishnan &Sivaramakrishnan 2008). Further research is needed,both to elucidate the ecology of aquatic insects inthe tree holes, and to evaluate the impact of diversepredators on tropical populations.ReferencesAnanthakrishnan, T.N. & K.G. Sivaramakrishnan (2008).Ecological Entomology: Insect Life in Odd Environments.Scientific Publishers, India, 142pp.Barnard, P.C. (1978). An unusual habitat for the caddislarva Glyphotaelius pellucidus (Retzuis) (Trichoptera:Limnephilidae). Entomological Gazette 29: 224.Champion, H.G. & S.K. Seth (1968). A Revised Survey ofthe Forest Types of India. Government of India Press, NewDelhi, 404pp.Das, K.S.A. (2008). Bird community structure along the altitudinalgradient in Silent Valley National Park, Western Ghats, India.PhD Thesis. Bharathiar University, Coimbatore.Edmondson, W.T. (1959). Fresh Water Biology, John Wiley andSons, New York, xx+1248pp.Greeney, H.F. (2001). The insects of plant-held waters: a reviewand bibliography. Journal of Tropical Ecology 17: 241–260.Jenkins, D.W. & S.J. Carpenter (1946). Ecology of the tree holebreeding mosquitoes of nearctic North America. EcologicalMonographs 16: 31–47.Kitching, R.L. (1971). An ecological study of water-filled treeholesand their position in the woodland ecosystem. Journalof Animal Ecology 40: 281–302.Kitching, R.L. (2000). Food Webs and Container Habitats: TheNatural History and Ecology of Phytotelmata. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, xiii+431.Kitching, R.L. (2001). Foodwebs in phytotelmata: bottom-upand top-down explanations. Annual Review of Entomology46: 729–60.Kitching, R.L. & A.G. Orr (1996). The food web from waterfilled treeholes in Kuala Belalong, Brunei. The RafflesBulletin of Zoology 44(2): 405–413.Lesage, L. & P.P. Harper (1976). Notes on the life history ofthe Toed-winged Beetle Anchytarsus Bicolor (Melsheimer)(Coleoptera: Ptilodactylidae). The Coleopterists Bulletin30(3): 233–238.Maguire, B.J. (1971). Phytotelmata: Biota and communitystructure determination in plant-held waters. Annual Reviewof Ecology and Systematics 2: 439–464.K.A. Nishadh & K.S.A. DasManilal, K.S (1988). Flora of Silent Valley: Tropical RainForests of India. The Mathrubhumi Press, Calicut, 398pp.Nagpal, B.N. & V.P. Sharma (1985). Tree hole breedingand resting of mosquitoes in Orissa. Indian Journal ofMalariology 22: 115-117.Paradise, C. J., & W.A. Dunson (1997). Insect speciesinteractions and resource effects in treeholes: are HelodidBeetles bottom-up facilitators of midge populations?Oecologia 109: 303–312.Ruta, R. (2007). Scirtidae of India and Sri Lanka—Part 1.The chlorizans-group of Cyphon Paykull, 1799 (Insecta:Coleoptera). Genus (Wroclaw) 17(2): 323–340.Rao, T.R., K.N. Pannicker & R. Reuben (1970). Tree-Holebreeding of Aedes aegypti in southern India: a preliminaryreport. Bulletin of World Health Organization 42(2): 333–334.Sharma, J.K., K.K.N. Nair, G. Mathew, K.K. Ramachandran,E.A. Jayson, K. Mohanadas, U.N. Nandakumar &P.V. Nair (2002). Studies on the Biodiversity of NewAmarambalam Reserved Forest of Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve,KFRI Research Report No.247, Peechi, 2002.Sota, T (1998). Microhabitat size distribution affects localdifference in community structure: metazoan communitiesin treeholes. Research in Population Ecology 40: 249–255.Srivastava D.S., J. Kolasa, J. Bengtsson, A. Gonzalez, S.P. Lawler, T.E. Miller, P. Munguia, T. Romanuk, D.C. Schneider & M.K. Trzcinski (2004). Are naturalmicrocosms useful model systems for ecology? Trends inEcology and Evolution 19: 379–384.Subramanian, K.A. & K.G. Sivaramakrishnan (2005). Habitatand microhabitat distribution of stream insect communitiesof the Western Ghats. Current Science 89(6): 976–987.Subramanian, K.A. & K.G. Sivaramkrishnan (2007). AquaticInsects of India - A Field Guide. Ashoka Trust for Researchin Ecology and Environment (ATREE), Bangalore, India,62pp.Taylor, R.C. & R.M. Ewers (2003). The invertebrate faunainhabiting tree holes in a Red Beech (Nothofagus fusca) tree.The Weta 27: 24–27.Udvardy, M.D. (1975). A Classification of The BiogeographicalProvinces of The World. International Union of Conservationof Nature and Natural Resources, Switzerland, 50pp.Vajravelu, E. (1990). Flora of Palghat, including Silent ValleyNational Park, Kerala. Botanical Survey of India, Culcutta,XIV+646pp.Yanoviak, S.P. (1999). Community structure in water-filled treeholes of Panama: effects of hole height and size. Selbyana20: 106–115.Yanoviak, S. P. (2001). The macrofauna of water-filled treeholes on Barro Colarado Island, Panama. Biotropica 33(1):110–120.Yanoviak, S.P. & O.M. Fincke (2005). Sampling methodsfor water filled tree holes and their artificial analogues, pp.168–185. In: Simon, R.L. (ed.). Insect Sampling in ForestEcosystems. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 320pp.3318Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3312–3318

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3319–3326Recent sightings of two very rare butterflies, Lethemargaritae Elwes, 1882 and Neptis nycteus de Nicéville,1890, from Sikkim, eastern Himalaya, IndiaSanjyog Rai 1,5 , Karma Dorjee Bhutia 2,5 & Krushnamegh Kunte 3,4,51Mickkhola Busti, Namchi, South Sikkim, Sikkim 737126, India2C/o Rabzang Lama, Sikaritar Rumtek, P.O. Rumtek Dharma Chakra Centre, East Sikkim, Sikkim 737135, India3FAS Center for Systems Biology, Harvard University, 52 Oxford St., Northwest Lab Room 458.40-3, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA4National Center for Biological Sciences, GKVK, Bellary Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560065, India5Indian Foundation for Butterflies, No. 9, Sneha Nagar, Amruthahalli Main Road, Byatarayanapura, Bengaluru, India.Email: 1 sanjyogvet@gmail.com, 2 kdgyatsov19@gmail.com, 3 krushnamegh@ifoundbutterflies.org (corresponding author),4krushnamegh@ncbs.res.inAbstract: Lethe margaritae Elwes, 1882 and Neptis nycteusde Nicéville, 1890 are very rare butterflies that are endemic tothe Himalaya, and are legally protected in India. However, theyhave not been recorded in India in nearly 100 years. Here wereview the available published information on their type localities,distribution and other natural history, and then report two recentsightings from Sikkim, northeastern India. Our sightings constituterediscoveries of the Indian populations of these species.Keywords: Endemism, faunal inventory, Lepidoptera,Limenitidinae, Nymphalidae, Satyrinae, species rediscovery,type localities, Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.Date of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: George MathewManuscript details:Ms # o2965Received 10 October 2011Final received 14 October 2012Finally accepted 24 October 2012Citation: Rai, S., K.D. Bhutia & K. Kunte (2012). Recent sightings of twovery rare butterflies, Lethe margaritae Elwes, 1882 and Neptis nycteus deNicéville, 1890, from Sikkim, eastern Himalaya, India . Journal of ThreatenedTaxa 4(14): 3319–3326.Copyright: © Sanjyog Rai, Karma Dorjee Bhutia & Krushnamegh Kunte2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allowsunrestricted use of this article in any medium for non-profit purposes,reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authorsand the source of publication.Acknowledgements: We thank Vijay Barve and Gaurav Agavekar forcoordinating our initial communication that resulted in this paper, and GaneshMani Pradhan and Chandan Jyoti Gogoi for supplying updated informationabout the historical localities mentioned in this paper. Motoki Saito provideddetails of the recent sighting of L. margaritae from Myanmar. We are gratefulto S.T. Lachungpa (IFS, PCCF-cum-Secretary, Forests), N.T. Bhutia (IFS,PCCF-cum-CWLW) and Usha Lachungpa (Principal Research Officer,Wildlife) of the Department of Forest, Environment & Wildlife Management,Government of Sikkim, for their continued support in documenting andmonitoring butterfly diversity in Sikkim. The specimen depicted in Image2 C-D is from the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University;thanks to Naomi Pierce for permission to photograph this specimen and toRod Eastwood for his assistance in locating and photographing it. This workis part of an ongoing project to survey rare, endemic and legally protectedbutterflies in Sikkim Himalaya, which is partly funded by the Ashoka Trustfor Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE) through an ATREESmall Grant For Research In Northeast India. This is Publication No. 4 of theIndian Foundation for Butterflies.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:23608402-76F9-477C-A6F0-C3E33027B253OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADThe eastern Himalaya host a significant proportionof India’s butterfly diversity, where many species areendemic; some of them are very rare, and some arelegally protected in India under the Indian Wildlife(Protection) Act, 1972 (Anonymous 1997; Gupta &Mondal 2005). However, little natural history andecological information exists on most of these species,and we know virtually nothing about their currentstatus and distribution. Some of these species haveeither not been seen in India or not reported in theliterature in decades. The lack of recent informationon their habitats, exact elevational distributions andspot records, flight periods, early stages and larvalhost plants is hampering their conservation.The renewed interest in the biology and conservationof Indian butterflies is slowly ameliorating thissituation. Two species: Symbrenthia silana andPapilio elephenor, which had not been reported innearly 100 years but protected under Schedule I of theIndian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, were recentlyrediscovered from Sikkim and western Assam,respectively (Choudhury 2010; Kunte 2010). Currentdistributions of many other Schedule I and ScheduleII species are being delineated and their populationsassessed with recent sightings and quantitative datafrom various parts of the eastern Himalaya andnortheastern India (Kunte et al. 2012).In this paper, we report the sightings of twoSchedule I species: Lethe margaritae and Neptisnycteus, from Chungthang and Rabum in the northSikkim District of the state of Sikkim in northeasternIndia. We will first review published historical recordsand other information on their distributions, includingtheir type localities because political boundarieshave shifted around the type localities from the timeJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–3326 3319

Lethe margaritae and Neptis nycteusof species descriptions. We will then provide exactlocality details of our two sightings, which appear torepresent the first published records of these speciesfrom India in nearly 100 years.Lethe margaritae Elwes, 1882 - Bhutan TreebrownReview of historical records, and distributionalrange of the species: Lethe margaritae Elwes, 1882(Nymphalidae: Satyrinae: Satyrini), also known as theBhutan Treebrown, was described from a single male(Elwes 1882). The female was subsequently describedbased on specimens supplied by de Nicéville andElwes (Moore 1890–1892). The exact type localityof L. margaritae is unknown. Elwes (1882) providedthe following details: “… I made arrangements witha native plant-collector, a Sikkim Bhotea, who hadaccompanied me on two expeditions into the interior,to visit the Chumbi Valley, on the Tibetan frontier ofSikkim, to collect seeds and insects. This he did duringthe months of August and September last. Though Icannot be certain of the exact localities in which theywere taken, I have little doubt, from my knowledgeof the country and the plants which came with them,that a considerable portion of them were taken onthe Tibetan side of the frontier. On two occasionsI have looked down into this valley from passes15,000–16,000 feet high on the Chola range, whichbounds Sikkim on the north-east; and, judging fromwhat I saw and from the information we have obtainedthrough native sources, it is a valley of somewhatdifferent climate and vegetation from the SikkimValley, though the Machu River, which drains it, flowssouthwards through Bhotan to the Bay of Bengal.It is said to be much drier in summer and colder inwinter than Sikkim valleys of similar elevation …”.Thus, although the title of Elwes’s article was “On acollection of butterflies from Sikkim”, the type localityof this species has subsequently been assumed to besomewhere in Bhutan (Moore 1890–1892; Bingham1905; Talbot 1947).This species has been reported or collected veryrarely since the species was described. An unspecifiednumber of specimens of both sexes was collected nearBuxa, in Bhutan (Elwes & Möller 1888; Moore 1890–1892). The species was subsequently reported from“Ta Shian Liang (5,000 ft), July 29” based on a singleS. Rai et al.male (South 1913). This locality is believed to be in theMishmi Hills (Talbot 1947; Gupta & Mondal 2005) incentral to eastern Arunachal Pradesh, but we have beenunable to confirm whether this is the case and find outanything about it. It could prove to be in southeasternTibet on the border with Arunachal Pradesh. A femalespecimen, currently in the Natural History Museum(London), was collected from “Darjeeling-Tukvar”(d’Abrera 1985), although we do not know the date ofcollection of this specimen. Tukvar is near DarjeelingTown, Darjeeling District, West Bengal, at an elevationof ca 1,200–1,500m. Finally, the latest record of thespecies was a male collected on 22 July 2000 nearthe Tonwang-Dabudam Village in the Kachin Stateof Myanmar, in dense evergreen forest (Shizuya et al.2005).As far as we know, the above few reports comprisethe entire original historical record for this species.Several major books merely list the species fromBhutan, without any new information about the speciesor details of any new specimens (Marshall & deNicéville 1882; Bingham 1905; Antram 1924; Talbot1947; Wynter-Blyth 1957). Therefore, we assumethat these records were largely taken from publishedliterature. The National Zoological Collection of theZoological Survey of India (ZSI) in Kolkata has threespecimens of unspecified sex from Bhutan (Gupta &Mondal 2005), although these specimens were partof the pre-independence British collection that ZSIinherited. We do not know in what condition the ZSIspecimens are because Gupta and Mondal copiedphotographs from d’Abrera (d’Abrera 1985) insteadof using pictures of the ZSI specimens. The Museumof Comparative Zoology at Harvard University doesnot have any specimens. The species has not beenreported from Nepal (Smith 1989, 2006).Based on available evidence, the species is knownto occur only in four specific localities: Buxa in Bhutan,Tukvar in Darjeeling District of West Bengal, Ta ShianLiang, which is presumably in the Mishmi Hills ofArunachal Pradesh, and Tonwang-Dabudam area inKachin, Myanmar. Of these, the West Bengal recordhad not been recognized as such, so this review adds thestate of West Bengal to the known range of this species.We also note that the Kachin record has extended therange of the species eastward by approximately 200kmto Myanmar, and that was a rediscovery of the species.Despite the mention of this species from Sikkim (see3320Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–3326

Lethe margaritae and Neptis nycteusbelow), there are no historical records from the state ofSikkim as currently politically recognized. Within afew years of describing this species, Elwes included itin his checklist of Sikkim butterflies but wrote: “I amas yet uncertain whether this beautiful species occursin Sikkim or not, as my first specimen was broughtby native collectors from some place to the eastwardof the Tista River; but Mr. Knyvett’s collectors havelately taken others of both sexes near Buxa, in Bhotan,and I have no doubt it occurs near to, if not within,British Bhotan …” (Elwes & Möller 1888). In hissubsequent checklist of butterflies, de Nicéville alsolisted the species for Sikkim but noted, “A rare speciesobtained by the native collectors only near Buxa,Bhutan” (de Nicéville 1894). Later, the distributionwas mentioned as “SIKKIM to BHUTAN, and in theMISHMI HILLS” (Talbot 1947), “Bhutan, Sikkim”(d’Abrera 1985), and “India: Sikkim; ArunachalPradesh (Mishmi Hills). Elsewhere: Bhutan.” (Gupta& Mondal 2005). The species was recently listedfor Sikkim, but without any details (Haribal 1992).Evidently, all the subsequent Sikkim mentions weretaken from the Elwes-de Nicéville butterfly checklistsfor Sikkim, in which they had clearly stated that thespecies did not occur in Sikkim but listed it there,anyway. We must conclude that the species had neveractually been collected from Sikkim.Elevational range and flight periodThe only specific elevation from which this specieshas so far been reported is “5,000 ft” (South 1913).The elevational range given by Talbot, “from about5,000 to 16,000 ft” (Talbot 1947), is apparently basedon a misunderstanding of Elwes’s description. Asmentioned above, the only prior mention of “16,000feet” was by Elwes when he described what he hadseen from the mountain pass into the lower valleyfrom which the male type specimen may have beencollected, “On two occasions I have looked down intothis valley from passes 15,000-16,000 feet high onthe Chola range” (Elwes 1882). Thus, based on thesingle record of South, the species is expected to occurat mid-elevations around 1,500m. The known flightperiod is from the end of July (South 1913; Shizuyaet al. 2005) to August or September when the typespecimen was collected (Elwes 1882).S. Rai et al.StatusThis species is apparently the largest member ofthe genus Lethe, with a wingspan of 85–95mm (deNicéville 1894; Talbot 1947; d’Abrera 1985). It hasbeen reported to be very rare, especially the female(Antram 1924; Evans 1932; Talbot 1947; Wynter-Blyth1957). The species is legally protected in India underSchedule I of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act,1972 (Anonymous 1997), and listed as endangeredaccording to Gupta & Mondal (2005). Its early stagesand larval host plants are unknown.Our new recordSR sighted L. margaritae at Chungthang (approx.27 0 36’N & 88 0 38’E), a small town in the North SikkimDistrict. Chungthang, at an altitude of 1,700m, is atthe confluence of Lachen and Lachung rivers, whichare then recognized as Teesta River downstream of theconfluence. The area was originally covered with midelevationmixed forests, but now forests are restrictedto very small fragments mostly on steep slopes. Alarge dam is currently being constructed as part of ahydroelectric project near Chungthang, which willfurther decimate forests in this area.Lethe margaritae was sighted in the town on thecool, rainy late evening (19:25 hr) of 26 July 2011. Itwas resting on a leaf of an ornamental Geranium plantoutside a house. On being disturbed, it flew through anopen window into one of the rooms inside the house.There it perched right next to an electric lamp that hadpreviously been turned on, its proboscis slowly curlingand uncurling, and wings partly spread. After takinga few pictures, SR released the butterfly outside thehouse, and it was not seen again.SR’s photographs (Image 1) agreed very well withthe previously published illustrations and photographsof male L. margaritae (Elwes 1882; Moore 1890-1892; d’Abrera 1985). The specimen exactly matchedthe identification key and other descriptions of IndianLethe, mainly: (a) it was exceptionally large for aLethe, (b) it had a narrow yellow discal band on upperforewing, and (c) on the under hindwing, it had a veryprominent pale band passing through the end of cellbut had no discal band (Evans 1932; Talbot 1947). Theelevation (1,700m) at which SR sighted this specimenand the date (26 July) on which it was seen are similar tothe previously known elevational range (1,500m) andthe flight period (end of July to August or September)Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–33263321

Lethe margaritae and Neptis nycteusS. Rai et al.© Sanjyog RaiImage 1. Male Lethe margaritae at Chungthang, North Sikkim District, Sikkim, India; 1,700m elevation; 26.vii.2011.© Sanjyog Raiof the species (Elwes 1882; South 1913).Neptis nycteus nycteus de Nicéville, 1890- Hockeystick SailerReview of historical records, and distributionalrange of the species: Neptis nycteus de Nicéville,1890 (Nymphalidae: Limenitidinae: Neptini), orthe Hockeystick Sailer, was described from threespecimens: “The type male specimen in Mr. G.C.Dudgeon’s collection was taken in June; the type femalein my own collection was taken in July; and a secondfemale specimen in Mr. A.V. Knyvett’s collection—were all taken at Tongloo on the Singalelah range atan elevation of about 12,000 feet” (de Nicéville 1890).de Nicéville mentioned the “HABITAT” of his newspecies as “Sikkim”, so the type locality (or ‘habitat’)has subsequently been given as Sikkim (Moore1899–1900; Eliot 1969). This needs a comment anda change. It is clear from de Nicéville’s descriptionthat the type specimens were collected from Tonglu(=Tongloo; approx. 27 0 02’N & 88 0 04’E according toGoogle Earth), which is one of the highest points on theSingalila Range (or Ridge). Tonglu is at an elevationof 3,046m, which is 9,993ft and not 12,000ft asmentioned in the original species description. Tongluand the Singalila Range are in the Darjeeling District,which was loosely included in “Sikkim” at the timeof the species description, but it now belongs to thestate of West Bengal. Since political boundaries haveshifted in this area and appear quite stable at present,the type locality of N. nycteus should now be givenas: Tonglu, Singalila Range, Darjeeling District, WestBengal. It is flanked by Sikkim (as currently politicallyrecognized) to the north and Nepal to the west.Very few records of this species have beenpublished before or since the species description.Elwes “took a single fresh male, … in the forest nearthe Rangbi jhora, on the road to Serail, at 6000 ft.,on June 7th” (Elwes & Möller 1888). Rangbi has asmall forest river, and it is also close to Senchal. Serailis a small settlement situated 8km west of Mungpoo,which is 35km southeast of Darjeeling in West Bengal.However, N. nycteus had not been described at thetime of his paper, so Elwes had assigned his specimento Neptis manasa Moore, 1857. de Nicéville wroteof Elwes’s record under Neptis nycteus in his ownchecklist of Sikkim butterflies: “This is No. 131,Neptis manasa, Moore, of Mr. Elwes’ list”, furthermentioning that the species was “Found by Mr.Dudgeon at 7,000 feet in Daling.” (de Nicéville 1894).Dudgeon’s specimen (sex unknown) from Dalingshould be different from the male type from Tongluused by de Nicéville (1890). Daling, also variouslyknown as Dalingkote or Dalimkote, was a historic fortthat is now under the Kalimpong subdivision of theDarjeeling District, West Bengal. There was a male inSwinhoe’s collection, “taken by a native collector at“Lachin Lachoong, 8000 to 16,000 feet elevation””(Moore 1899–1900). Lachen and Lachung are in theNorth Sikkim District of modern Sikkim (see below).Bingham did not report any new specimens (Bingham1905). Eliot mentioned distribution of this speciesfrom Bhutan (Eliot 1969), so the Natural HistoryMuseum (London) appears to have specimen(s) taken3322Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–3326

Lethe margaritae and Neptis nycteusfrom that country, although we do not know the detailsof these specimens. Since 1969, the species has beenreported as “Very Rare” from Manang and Kathmanduin central Nepal, which has extended the species rangenorthwestward by approximately 300km (Smith1989). There are three specimens in the collection ofthe ZSI Kolkata (Gupta & Mondal 2005), although wesuspect that these were among the specimens listed byde Nicéville in previous literature (de Nicéville 1890,1894) (de Nicéville was curator at the Indian Museum,where many of his specimens were and still aredeposited, and which is now part of the ZSI Kolkata).As far as we know, this is the complete compilation ofall the published records for this species.The species range has so far been variously givenas only in Sikkim (Moore 1899–1900; Evans 1932),or Sikkim and Bhutan (Eliot 1969; d’Abrera 1985),or central Nepal to Sikkim and Bhutan (Smith 1989,2006). From the above discussion regarding the typelocality, northern West Bengal should now be includedin the range of the species, from where most Indianexamples appear to have been taken. On the otherhand, only one historical record, that of the male fromLachen/Lachung in Swinhoe’s collection (Moore 1899–1900), can be attributed to the modern state of Sikkim.The species was mentioned for Sikkim but withoutany information in two important books (Wynter-Blyth 1957; Haribal 1992), so we assume that this wasbased on historical records summarized above andnot on any new records. A subspecies, Neptis nycteusmenpae Huang, 1998, has recently been describedfrom Hamni, Metok, southeastern Tibet (Huang1998), which is approximately 700km northeast of therange of the nominotypical subspecies. Evans (1932)mentioned another subspecies, phesimensis Tytler,1915, from the Naga Hills, but this taxon is now treatedas a subspecies under Neptis nemorum Oberthür, 1906based on the similarities of the male genitalia with thatspecies (Eliot 1969).Elevational range and flight periodThe elevational range of this species is given as1,767m to 4,875m (Moore 1899–1900; Smith 1989;Gupta & Mondal 2005). The higher end of this range(4,875m) is based on the male taken at Lachen/Lachung at “8000 to 16,000 feet elevation” (Moore1899–1900). The Lachen and Lachung areas in theNorth Sikkim District indeed cover this elevationS. Rai et al.range, but here the tree line is well below 4,800m,so the “16,000 feet” elevation must be wrong. Wemust conclude that this specimen was collected at alower elevation in the range of 2,400–3,500 m nearLachen or Lachung, where a suitable habitat for thisNeptis exists. The elevational range of this species cantherefore be determined to be approximately 1,800 to3,500 m. Thus, this is a mid- to high-elevation species,and it appears to have a single brood per year. Theflight period has been reported to be June–July in theSingalila Range (de Nicéville 1890), and May–Junein Manang and Kathmandu in central Nepal (Smith1989).StatusThe species has been reported as very rare (Evans1932; Wynter-Blyth 1957; Smith 1989). It is legallyprotected in India under Schedule I of the Wildlife(Protection) Act, 1972 (Anonymous 1997), and listedas critically endangered by Gupta & Mondal (2005).Its early stages and larval host plants are unknown.Our new recordsKDB sighted N. nycteus nycteus twice at Rabum(approx. 27 0 44’N & 88 0 32’E), a small village about18km. from the town of Lachen in the North SikkimDistrict. This was at an altitude of 2,990m, and on theroad leading to the Gurudongmar Lake. The regionis mountainous and rugged, with some high-elevationstunted forests, small human settlements and sparselydispersed agricultural and pastoral fields.The first sighting was made on 21 June 2011 at09:23hr, when the butterfly was feeding from fresh cowdung on the road while slowly opening and closing itswings. The second sighting, which may or may not beof the same individual, was made two days later, on 23June 2011 at 11:54hr, around the same location (Image2A–B). This time the butterfly was perched on a smallUrtica shrub. It had rained the previous night, and theweather was gloomy when KDB spotted the butterfly.The butterfly basked in the occasional mild sunshinewith its wings spread flat. It tolerated human presence,but it would fly off and settle on a nearby weed whenapproached too closely. The sex of the specimen(s)that KDB photographed is unknown.We would also like to take this opportunity to reportanother spot record from Gangtok, the state capital ofSikkim. This is based on the sole specimen of thisJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–33263323

Lethe margaritae and Neptis nycteusS. Rai et al.Image 2. Neptis nycteus nycteus in Sikkim, India. A–B - At Rabum, near Lachen, on the road to Gurudongmar Lake,North Sikkim District; 2,990m elevation; 23.vi.2011. C–D - Gangtok, East Sikkim District; 3,500m elevation; date unknown,presumably late 1800s or early 1900s; currently deposited in the butterfly collection at the Museum of ComparativeZoology, Harvard University, USA. Photographs and copyright: A-B: Karma Dorjee Bhutia. C-D: photographs:Krushnamegh Kunte, copyright: President and Fellows of Harvard College.species in the butterfly collection at the Museum ofComparative Zoology, Harvard University, USA(Image 2C–D). The four labels currently attached tothis specimen read: (1) “Gangtok Sikkim Himalayamont. 3500 m Juni”, (2) “A G Weeks Collection”, (3)“477” and (4) “Shemis v. nycteis”. The collectiondate of this specimen is unknown, but assumed to befrom the late 1800s to very early 1900s, when mostof the specimens from the A.G. Weeks collectionwere presumably acquired (Rod Eastwood, personalcommunication).The photographed individuals (Image 2) agreewell with the previously published illustrations andphotographs of several specimens of this species(Moore 1899–1900; d’Abrera 1985; Smith 1989;Gupta & Mondal 2005; Smith 2006). They also closelyfollow the identification keys and other descriptions ofIndian Neptis, mainly: (a) the upper forewing discalspot in three joins cell streak, forming a hockey sticklikecurved marking, (b) this spot does not fill the baseof 3, (c) all the markings are white, (d) the underside isrich ochre brown, and (e) under hindwing basal area,especially the cell, has white markings (Evans 1932;Eliot 1969).ConclusionsOur sighting of Lethe margaritae appears to bethe first one reported since 1913 in India, therefore itconstitutes a rediscovery of the species in the country.As far as we know, it is only the second record of thespecies in the past 100 years throughout its range,following the recent sighting in Kachin, Myanmar,in July 2000. It also confirms the distribution of thespecies in Sikkim. Neptis nycteus has recently beenrecorded from central Nepal (Smith 1989, 2006) andit occurs in Bhutan (Eliot 1969), but our sightings3324Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–3326

Lethe margaritae and Neptis nycteusS. Rai et al.Image 3. Distributional maps of Lethe margaritae (A) and Neptis nycteus (B). © Krushnamegh Kunteappear to be the first ones to be reported from India inseveral decades. These spot records indicate localities,elevations and habitat types where more intensivesurveying and monitoring efforts are needed with thehope of accumulating further sightings of these veryrare and endemic butterflies (Image 3).All the available information on the occurrence ofthese two species, reviewed above, along with our newrecords, may be briefly summarized as follows:1. Lethe margaritae: This species was describedfrom a male specimen collected most likelysomewhere in Bhutan. Only five specific localitiesare now known for this species: Tukvar (DarjeelingDistrict, West Bengal), Chungthang (North SikkimDistrict, Sikkim), Buxa (Bhutan), Ta Shian Liang(presumably in the Mishmi Hills, Arunachal Pradesh),and Tonwang-Dabudam (Kachin State, Myanmar).The species is thus narrowly endemic to the approx.1,000 km-long strip of mid-elevation evergreen forestin the eastern Himalaya, from Darjeeling to Kachin.It occurs at 1,500–1,700 m from the end of July upto September, and appears to be univoltine. It is oneof the rarest eastern Himalayan butterflies, and it islegally protected in India under Schedule I of theWildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.2. Neptis nycteus: This species was describedfrom Tongu in the Singalila Range, DarjeelingDistrict, West Bengal. The nominotypical subspecieshas subsequently been reported from Manang andKathmandu (Kathmandu District, central Nepal),Rangbi jhora near Sarail and Daling (DarjeelingDistrict, West Bengal), Gangtok (East SikkimDistrict), Rabung and Lachen/Lachung (North SikkimDistrict), and Bhutan. The nominotypical subspeciesthus occurs from central Nepal to Bhutan. SubspeciesNeptis nycteus menpae Huang, 1998 has so far beenreported only from Hamni, Metok, SE Tibet. Thespecies on the whole is thus endemic to a strip ofapprox. 1,000km in the central and eastern Himalaya.The elevational range of the species is 1,800–3,500 m.It is univoltine, and flies from May to July. It is a veryrare species that is legally protected in India underSchedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.Additional pictures of these two species areavailable online at:http://ifoundbutterflies.org/441-lethe/lethe-margaritaeJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–33263325

Lethe margaritae and Neptis nycteushttp://ifoundbutterflies.org/153-neptis/neptis-nycteusAdditional information and pictures will be madeavailable on the above pages as they accumulate withfurther sightings in Sikkim and elsewhere in India.ReferencesAnonymous (1997). The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (asamended up to 1993). 4th updated edn. Natraj Publishers,Dehra Dun, 158pp.Antram, C.B. (1924). Butterflies of India. Thacker, Spink &Co., Calcutta (Kolkata), 226pp.Bingham, C.T. (1905). The Fauna of British India, includingCeylon and Burma (Butterflies), Vol. 1. Taylor and Francis,London, 537pp.Choudhury, K. (2010). Rediscovery of two rare butterfliesPapilio elephenor Doubleday, 1845 and Shijimia mooreiLeech, 1889 from proposed Ripu-Chirang WildlifeSanctuary, Assam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2(4):831–834.d’Abrera, B. (1985). Butterflies of the Oriental Region. PartII: Nymphalidae, Satyridae & Amathusidae. Hill House,Melbourne, 246–534.de Nicéville, L. (1890). On new and little-known butterfliesfrom the Indian Region, with descriptions of three newgenera of Hesperiidae. Journal of the Bombay NaturalHistory Society 5: 199–225.de Nicéville, L. (1894). A list of the butterflies of Sikhim, pp.116–187. The Gazetteer of Sikhim. Bengal Secretariat Press,Calcutta (Kolkata).Eliot, J.N. (1969). An analysis of the Eurasian and AustralianNeptini (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Bulletin of theBritish Museum, Natural History (Entomology) Suppl. 15:3–155+153 B&W plates.Elwes, H.J. (1882). On a collection of butterflies from Sikkim.Proceedings of the Zoological Society, London 1882: 398–407.Elwes, H.J. & O. Möller (1888). A catalogue of the Lepidopteraof Sikkim; with additions, corrections, and notes on seasonaland local distribution. Transactions of the EntomologicalSociety, London 1888: 269–464.Evans, W.H. (1932). The Identification of Indian Butterflies.2nd edition. Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai,454pp.Gupta, I.J. & D.K. Mondal. (2005). Red Data Book (Part-2)S. Rai et al.- Butterflies of India. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata,535pp.Haribal, M. (1992). The Butterflies of Sikkim Himalayaand their Natural History. Sikkim Nature ConservationFoundation, Gangtok, 217pp.Huang, H. (1998). Research on the butterflies of theNamjagbarwa Region, S.E. Tibet. Neue EntomologischeNachrichten 41: 207–263.Kunte, K. (2010). Rediscovery of the federally protected ScarceJester Butterfly Symbrenthia silana de Nicéville, 1885(Nymphalidae: Nymphalinae) from the Eastern Himalayaand Garo Hills, northeastern India. Journal of ThreatenedTaxa 2(5): 858–866.Kunte, K., S. Sondhi, B.M. Sangma, R. Lovalekar, K.Tokekar & G. Agavekar (2012). Butterflies of the GaroHills of Meghalaya, northeastern India: their diversity andconservation. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(10): 2933–2992.Marshall, G.F.L. & L. de Nicéville. (1882). The Butterfliesof India, Burmah and Ceylon. Volume I. Nymphalidae.Danainae, Satyrinae, Elymniinae, Morphinae, Acraeinae.The Calcutta Central Press Co., Calcutta (Kolkata), 327pp.Moore, F. (1890-1892). Lepidoptera Indica. Vol. I. Rhopalocera.Family Nymphalidae. Sub-families Euploeinae andSatyrinae. Reeve & Co, London, 317, Plates 311–394pp.Moore, F. (1899-1900). Lepidoptera Indica. Vol. IV.Rhopalocera. Family Nymphalidae. Sub-familiesNymphalinae (continued), groups Limenitina, Nymphalina,and Argynnina. Reeve & Co, London, 260, Plates 287–378pp.Shizuya, H., Y. Watanabe, M. Saito & T. Soe. (2005). Basicinformation on butterflies of Kachin State, Myanmar (Part2). Butterflies 39: 29–39.Smith, C. (1989). Butterflies of Nepal (Central Himalaya).Tecpress Service L.P., Bangkok, 352pp.Smith, C. (2006). Illustrated Checklist of Nepal’s Butterflies.2 nd Revised Edition. Walden Book House, Kathmandu,129pp.South, R. (1913). A list of butterflies collected by Captain F.M. Bailey in western China, south-eastern Tibet, and theMishmi Hills, 1911. Journal of the Bombay Natural HistorySociety 22: 345–365, 598–615.Talbot, G. (1947). The Fauna of British India, including Ceylonand Burma: Butterflies, Vol. 2. Taylor and Francis, London,506pp.Wynter-Blyth, M.A. (1957). Butterflies of the Indian Region.Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai, 523+572plates.3326Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3319–3326

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3327–3332Parambassis waikhomi, a new species of glassfish(Teleostei: Ambassidae) from Loktak Lake, northeasternIndiaK. Geetakumari 1 & C. Basudha 21,2ICAR, Research Complex for NEH Region Manipur Centre, Lamphelpat Imphal, Manipur 795004, IndiaEmail: 1 geetameme@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 devibasu@yahoo.comFreshwater glass perches of family Ambassidae aresmall to medium-sized semi transparent fishes whichare extensively consumed by larger fishes. Currently,the family comprises of four genera namely Chanda,Gymnochanda, Paradoxodacna and Parambassis(Roberts 1994). Fishes of the genus ParambassisBleeker are characterized by 30–100 scales in lateralseries, 9–16 dorsal and anal fin rays, 10+14=24 or10+15=25 vertebrae, preorbital bone with serrationson ridge and edge comprising a diverse and possiblypolyphyletic array of strictly freshwater ambassidswidely distributed in the Indian subcontinent mainlandand peninsular Southeast Asia and the Australian regionincluding New Guinea (Roberts 1994). As many as 12species of Parambassis of Asia are currently treatedvalid (Roberts 1994; Kottelat 2003) of which five areDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: Neelesh DahanukarManuscript details:Ms # o3060Received 09 January 2012Final received 18 October 2012Finally accepted 01 November 2012Citation: Geetakumari, K. & C. Basudha (2012). Parambassis waikhomi,a new species of glassfish (Teleostei: Ambassidae) from Loktak Lake,northeastern India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3327–3332.Copyright: © K. Geetakumari & C. Basudha 2012. Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this articlein any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution byproviding adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: The authors are grateful to Prof. W. Vishwanath,Department of Life Sciences, Manipur University for his valuable help. Weare also thankful to P. Musikasinthorn and T. Roberts for providing literature.The first author records her thankfulness to Department of Biotechnologyfor financial assistance for DBT-RA programme.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:FD88B901-64DE-42AA-91A8-903014706048OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADAbstract: Parambassis waikhomi, a new species of glassfishfrom Loktak Lake, Chindwin basin in Manipur, northeastern Indiais distinguished from its congeners by the presence of 58–60lateral line scales; two predorsal bones; a vertically elongatedhumeral spot; 24 vertebrae; maxilla reaching to ⅓ of the orbit; 8.2-10.9 interorbital width; four preorbital ridge, 11 preorbital edge,six supraorbital ridge, 18 serrae at lower edge of preoperculum,24 serrae at hind margin of preoperculum. The species differsfrom its nearest congener P. ranga by the presence of 9–10 (vs.12–13) pectoral fin rays and 19–20 (vs. 22–28) gill rakers.Keywords: Chindwin basin, Glass-perch, India, new species.from India, viz., P. baculis, P. dayi, P. lala, P. rangaand P. thomasi, three from Sumatra and Borneo, viz., P.apogonoides, P. macrolepis, and P. wolffi, another threefrom Myanmar, viz., P. pulcinella, P. tennaserimensis,and P. vollmeri, and the last one P. siamensis is fromMalaysia and Chao Phraya namely. Sen (1995) reportedthree ambassid fishes from Meghalaya, viz., Chandanama, Pseudambassis baculis (now Parambassis: seeRoberts 1989) and P. ranga. Vishwanath et al. (2007)reported four ambassids from northeastern India, viz.,Chanda nama, Parambassis baculis, P. lala and P.ranga. Recently, Geetakumari (2012) also describedParambassis bistigmata from northeastern India.The collection of fishes from Chindwin drainage ofManipur included an undescribed species which isherein described as Parambassis waikhomi sp. nov.Materials and MethodsMeasurements were made point to point withdial calipers to the nearest 0.1mm and expressed aspercentages of standard length (SL). Counts andmeasurements were made on the left side of specimensunder a PC-based binocular stereozoom microscope(Olympus SZ40) with transmitted light. Methodsfor counts and measurements follow Kottelat (2003).Terminology for cephalic serration follows Fraser-Brunner (1955). Clearing and staining of specimensJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3327–3332 3327

A new Parambassis speciesfor osteology followed Hollister (1934). Identificationand nomenclature of bones and vertebral countsfollowed Greenwood (1976). Materials examined inthis study are deposited in Research Centre ManipurMuseum of Fishes (RCMMF).Parambassis waikhomi sp. nov.(Figs. 1–3, Image 1)urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:29454ED6-D57A-403C-9E4E-1791FC8121A1Type materialHolotype: 19.xi.2011, 33.5mm SL, Chindwinbasin, Loktak Lake, Manipur State, India, 24 0 33’29”N& 93 0 48’58”E; coll. Bimol Singh (RCMMF-1).Paratypes: 16 ex., 31.5–39.8 mm SL; samecollection data as holotype (RCMMF-2–17). 3 ex.,34.2–36.3 mm SL; dissected, cleared and stained forosteology (RCMMF-18–20).DiagnosisParambassis waikhomi sp. nov. can be distinguishedfrom all its congeners by the following combination ofcharacters: 58–60 lateral line scales; 9–10 pectoral finrays; 19–20 gill rakers; two predorsal bones; presenceof a vertically elongated humeral spot; maxilla reachesto ⅓ of the orbit; 8.2–10.9 interorbital width; fourpreorbital ridge; 11 preorbital edge; six supraorbitalridge; 18 serrae at lower edge of preoperculum; 24serrae at hind margin of preoperculum.DescriptionMorphometric data and counts are presentedK. Geetakumari & C. Basudhain Table 1. Body laterally compressed, dorsal andabdominal profiles convex rising steeply from occiputto base of first dorsal fin, then gently sloping posteriorly.Eyes large, its margin free. Gill membranes free fromisthmus; six branchiostegal rays. First branchial archwith 19–20 gill rakers. Two predorsal bones.Nasal spine present. Preorbital ridge with 4–5retrorse spine-like serrae and partly hidden in skin;preorbital edge with 11–12 distinct, exposed serraeprojecting ventrally. Suborbital ridge not serrated.Supraorbital ridge with 5–6 retrorse serrae, partlysubderminal. Preopercular ridge absent. Lower edgeof preoperculum with 18–19 serrae, posteriormostones largest; hind margin of preoperculum with 24–25minute denticulations; interoperculum smooth. (Fig.1).Body covered by scales, except in predorsal area.PreorbitaledgePreorbital ridgeLower edge ofpreoperculumSupraorbitalridgeHind marginofpreoperculumFigure 1. Cephalic serration of Parambassis waikhomi,36.3mm SL (RCMMF-19)© W. Vishwanath SinghImage 1. Left lateral view of Parambassis waikhomi (RCMMF-16), 31.5mm SL3328Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3327–3332

A new Parambassis speciesK. Geetakumari & C. BasudhaTable 1. Morphological characters of Parambassis waikhomi sp. nov.CharactersHolotypeParatypes N=19Mean Min. Max. S.D.Standard length (mm) 33.5 35.7 31.5 39.8 2.4In % SLHead length 34.6 39.3 30.9 47.7 4.6Predorsal length 42.5 42.6 39.0 46.1 2.1Preanal length 15.6 19.8 15.3 24.3 2.6Body depth 37.9 37.9 35.4 40.4 1.6Depth of caudal peduncle 11.6 11.1 9.9 12.2 0.8Length of caudal peduncle 11.5 13.9 11.5 16.3 1.4Body width 13.3 13.4 10.5 16.2 1.6Snout length 9.4 9.7 7.8 11.5 1.2Eye diameter 12.3 11.5 10.2 12.7 0.9Interorbital width 9.5 9.6 8.2 10.9 0.8Length of dorsal-fin base 43.7 45.1 42.6 47.6 1.7Length of anal-fin base 32.3 31.3 28.6 34.0 1.6Length of pelvic-fin spine 18.0 17.7 15.3 20.1 1.3Length of pectoral fin 25.7 24.6 21.5 27.7 2.1Length of upper caudal-fin lobe 28.2 29.1 26.2 32.0 2.1Length of median caudal-fin rays 15.5 15.9 13.2 18.6 1.7Length of lower caudal-fin lobe 28.3 27.3 23.4 31.1 2.3Head naked, except 3–4 (4) scale rows on cheek.Lateral-line scales 58–60; 10 rows of scales betweenlateral line and base of last dorsal spine; ½ 9/1/9 ½scale rows in transverse line across caudal peduncle.First dorsal fin with seven spines, second one longest;second dorsal fin continuous with first with one spineand 14–15 (14) branched rays (last two rays insertedon same pterygiophore counted as one). Anal finwith three spines, third one longest, with 14–15 (14)branched rays. Pelvic fin with one spine and fivebranched rays. Pectoral fin with 10 rays. Caudal finwith 11+11 branched rays, vertebrae 24 (3).Dentition: Many small conical teeth are embeddedin the premaxilla where the teeth in the outer row islarger. Dentary is also with many small villiform teethwhere 5–6 canine-like teeth are randomly arrangedmedially on each side (Fig. 2).Coloration: In 10% formalin: head and bodybackground creamish. A faint blackish axial streakon body, darker posteriorly. Each scale marginsoutlined by indistinct melanophores. A verticallyelongated humeral blotch, more or less continuing avertically elongated triangular blotch immediately inFigure 2. Dentition of Parambassis waikhomi, 36.3 mm SL(RCMMF-19)Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3327–33323329

A new Parambassis speciesK. Geetakumari & C. BasudhaFigure 3. Distribution map of Parambassis waikhomifront of first dorsal-fin origin. Second to fourth spineof first dorsal with a decorative distinct blackish outermargin, second dorsal hyaline. Pectoral, pelvic andanal fins hyaline. Caudal fin with a series of unevenlydistributed dots between each ray.Live colours: Pattern as in preserved specimens,general colouration yellowish to silvery, body semitransparentwith yellowish-chin.EtymologyThis new species is named after Prof. WaikhomVishwanath honouring his contributions to theichthyology of freshwater fishes of northeasternIndia.DistributionPresently known from the Loktak Lake, Chindwinbasin, Manipur, northeastern India (Fig. 3).DiscussionParambassis waikhomi sp. nov. is distinguishedfrom its nearest congener Parambassis ranga inhaving 19–20 (vs. 22–28) gill rakers, 9–10 (vs. 12–13)pectoral fin rays. Presence of six supraorbital spine(vs. absence), more number of moderately large serraein preorbital ridge (11–12 vs. 7) and absence of serrae(vs. presence of 8 large serrae) in preopercular ridge.Parambassis waikhomi sp. nov. differs from P.apogonoides, P. dayi, P. macrolepis, P. siamensis, P.thomasi, and P. wolffii by the presence (vs. absence) ofa humeral spot. It differs from P. apogonoides, P. dayi,P. macrolepis, P. siamensis, and P. thomasi, P. wolffiiby the absence (vs. presence) of predorsal scales. Itis also distinguished from P. apogonoides, P. dayi,P. thomasi, P. wolffii and P. vollmeri in having morescale (58–60 vs. 34–50) in the lateral series. It differsfrom P. vollmeri in having more gill rakers (19–20 vs.13–16), and the absence of serrae (vs. presence of 11serrae) in the preopercular ridge. It also differs fromP. bistigmata in the absence (vs. presence) of twodistinct black spots on either side of the anal fin originconnected by a narrow black curved line.Parambassis waikhomi sp. nov. differs from P.baculis in having more gill rakers (19–20 vs. 12–15),3330Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3327–3332

A new Parambassis speciesless scales in lateral series (58–60 vs. 80–100), lesspectoral fin rays (9–10 vs. 13). It differs from P. lalain having less scales in lateral series (58–60 vs. 66),absence of serrae in the preopercular ridge (vs. 9 largeserrae), absence of vertical dark bands (vs. presence oftwo broad vertical dark bands) in the flanks.The new species is distinguished from P.tennaserimensis in having more scales (58–60 vs. 53) inthe lateral series, more serrae in the preorbital edge (11vs. 5) and more serrae in lower edge of preoperculum(18 vs. 9). It differs from P. pulcinella in (absence vs.presence) of a conspicuous compressed hump in frontof first dorsal-fin origin and in having more number ofscales in lateral series (58–60 vs. 51–53).Parambassis baculis and P. ranga were previouslyincluded under the genera Pseudambassis (Talwar &Jhingran 1991). Later in 1994, Roberts transferredthem as the generic characters fit that of Parambassis.According to Roberts (1994), Parambassis can bedivided into two species groups; one usually without ahumeral spot and with short dorsal and anal fins (eachwith only 9–11 soft rays) and another usually with ahumeral spot and with long dorsal and anal fins (each12–17 soft rays). He felt, however, that these groupswere not monophyletic. Parambassis waikhomi sp.nov. apparently belongs to the later group.Some of the glass fishes are widely distributed indifferent basins. Roberts (1994) stated that glassperchesare most numerous in India and Borneo. The widespreadnature of occurrence could be attributed either to theornamental trade and widespread introductions or the‘widespread’ species could be species complexes.However, the populations of various species in manybasins need examination and verification.K. Geetakumari & C. BasudhaComparative materialsParambassis baculis: MUMF Uncat., 5 ex., 38.5–42.6 mm SL, India: Tripura, Agartala.Parambassis bistigmata: MUMF/Per-105, 39.3mmSL; India: Arunachal Pradesh state: Ranga River,Kimin station, Brahmaputra drainage.Parambassis lala: MUMF/Per/G-3-7, 5ex., 38.0–38.5 mm SL, India: Assam: Silchar.Parambassis ranga: RGUMF-0147, 1ex., 40.2mmSL, India: Arunachal Pradesh: Kimin. MUMF/Per/G-8-11, 4ex., 38.0–40.5 mm SL, India: Manipur:Tamenglong: Leimatak River.Published informations used for comparison:Roberts (1994) for P. apogonoides, P. dayi, P.macrolepis, P. siamensis, P. thomasi, P. vollmeri, P.wolffii and Kottelat (2003) for P. pulcinellaReferencesFraser-Brunner, A. (1955). A synopsis of the centropomidfishes of the subfamily Chandidae, with description of anew genus and two new species. Bulletin of Raffles Museum25 (1954[1955]): 185–213.Geetakumari, K. (2012). Parambassis bistigmata, a newspecies of glassperch from north-eastern India (Teleostei:Ambassidae). Zootaxa 3317: 59–64.Greenwood, P. H. (1976). A review of the family Centropomidae(Pisces: Perciformes). Bulletin of the British Museum(Natural History) 29(1): 1–81.Hollister, G. (1934). Clearing and dyeing fish for bone study.Zoologica 12: 89–101.Kottelat, M. (2003). Parambassis pulcinella, a new speciesof glassperch (Teleostei: Ambassidae) from the AtaranRiver basin (Myanmar), with comments on the familygroupnames Ambassidae, Chandidae and Bogodidae.Ichthyological Exploration of Freshwaters 14(1): 9–18.Roberts, T. R. (1989). The freshwater fishes of western BorneoKey to species of the genus Parambassis of India1. Presence of humeral spot .............................................................................................................................. 2Absence of humeral spot ................................................................................................................................ 52. Body with three dusky bars ..................................................................................................................... P. lalaBody without bars ........................................................................................................................................... 33. Preopercular ridge with serrae ............................................................................................................ P. rangaPreopercular ridge with no serrae .................................................................................................................. 44. Presence of 2 distinct black spots on either side of the anal fin ................................................... P. bistigmataAbsence of 2 distinct black spots on either side of the anal fin ...................................................................... 5St5. Gill rakers on lower limb of 1 arch 12–15 ........................................................................................ P. baculisGill rakers on lower limb of 1 st arch 19–20 ..................................................................... P. waikhomi sp. nov.6. Anal fin scale sheath with only row of scale ........................................................................................... P. dayiAnal fin scale sheath with two row of scales ................................................................................... P. thomasiJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3327–33323331

A new Parambassis species(Kalimantan Barat, Indonesia). Memoirs of the CaliforniaAcademy of Sciences 14: i-xii+1‒210.Roberts, T.R. (1994). Systematic revision of tropical Asianfreshwater glassperches (Ambassidae), with descriptionsof three new species. Natural History Bulletin of SiameseSociety 42(1994 [1995]): 263–290.Sen, N. (1995). Pisces, state fauna of Meghalaya. ZoologicalSurvey of India 1: 483–606.K. Geetakumari & C. BasudhaTalwar, P.K. & A.G. Jhingran (1991). Inland Fishes of Indiaand Adjacent Countries. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co.Pvt. Ltd., N. Delhi, 1991, 2 vols, xix+1158.Vishwanath, W., W.S. Lakra & U.K. Sarkar (2007). Fishesof North East India. National Bureau of Fish GeneticResources, Lucknow, India, 264pp.3332Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3327–3332

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3333–3341Current status of Marsh Crocodiles Crocodylus palustris(Reptilia: Crocodylidae) in Vishwamitri River, VadodaraCity, Gujarat, IndiaRaju Vyas505, Krishnadeep Tower, Mission Road, Fatehgunj, Vadodara, Gujarat 390002, IndiaEmail: razoovyas@hotmail.comAbstract: Data presented here is based on a three year study(2008–2010) on a population of Mugger Crocodylus palustrisinhabiting Vishwamitri River near Vadodara City, Gujarat State,India. In total, 155 Muggers were counted in the 25km riverstretch during 2010. In all, 40 burrows were observed along theriver bank, and the same were clumped in certain sections of theriver. Muggers fed eight species of birds, and domestic livestockin addition to scavenging. Eight instances of human-crocodileconflicts were observed including four human causalities. A total90 Muggers were rescued from the urban areas and the samewere relocated elsewhere in the river system. Various typesof threats to Mugger were also noticed including habitat loss,alteration and soil erosion and mortality due to rail traffic. Thepresent study suggests further research to propose strategies toconserve this population.Keywords: Mugger-human conflicts, rescue, river system,translocation, urban area.Date of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: S. BhupathyManuscript details:Ms # o2977Received 26 October 2011Final received 05 October 2012Finally accepted 20 October 2012Citation: Vyas, R. (2012). Current status of Marsh Crocodiles Crocodyluspalustris (Reptilia: Crocodylidae) in Vishwamitri River, Vadodara City,Gujarat, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3333–3341Copyright: © Raju Vyas 2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 UnportedLicense. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in any medium for nonprofitpurposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate creditto the authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: I am thankful to all staff members of NGOs andgovernment organization listed in Appendix 2, for the help in variousaspects of study and survey. Special thanks to the Conservator of Forest,Social Forestry, Vadodara for the help in survey. I am especially thankful toMrs. Snehal Bhavsar, Rajesh Bhavsar, Manoj Thakar, Vishal Thakor, ViralRoy, Pritesh Patel and Kartik Upadhayay for providing photographs for thearticle and accompanying me during the field work. Finally, I am grateful toKhushboo R. Vyas for reviewing the draft manuscript.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:23DA3FAB-C113-4008-A8C4-1CDD4E92EAFBOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADThe Marsh Crocodile or Mugger Crocodyluspalustris is one of the common and wide spreadcrocodilian species in India. This species is categorizedas nationally ‘Vulnerable’ subsequent to an assessmentfollowing IUCN criteria for threatened species (Molur& Walker 1998) and has the highest legal protection inIndia as it is listed in Schedule I of the Indian Wildlife(Protection) Act 1972. During the early seventies,while the Mugger populations in India were reportedlydeclining (Whitaker & Andrews 2003), Oza (1975)reported over 50 individuals of this species in SayajiSarovar (Ajwa Village) in close vicinity to VadodaraCity, Gujarat. This population has reportedly declineddue to hunting and illegal fishing in the down-streamof River Vishwamitri (Vyas & Vyas 2002; Vyas 2010a).The present study was carried out between January2008 and December 2010 to determine its currentstatus and assess issues related to conservation.Materials and MethodsStudy Area: The present study was conducted in a25km long and 40–60 m wide stretch of VishwamitriRiver (from Vemali Village to Vadsar Bridge VadodaraCity). The river flows through Vadodara City fromnorth to south (Image 1) and it carries a significantquantum of sewage from the city and effluents fromthe Gujarat Industrial Development Corporations ofKalali and Makarpura. The downstream of the riveris highly polluted (Gujarat Pollution Board 2007–08)and the water color varied from dark green-black-pinkto red with a putrefied smell. The river stretch wasdivided into four sections based on the developmentof the city (Appendix 1) and river bank for easyapproach. The section-wise features of the river andgeneral information are available in Vyas (2010b).Mugger count: Muggers were counted (visually)during December 2008–January 2009 and night surveysJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–3341 3333

Muggers in VadodaraR. VyasImage 1. Map of the study area: Vishwamitri River stretch and Vadodara City.were done during January 2010 following Choudhary& Rao (1982) and De Vos (1982). Basking animalswere counted from vantage points on the river bankduring mid-day using a pair of binoculars (8x40). Sizeclass of the Muggers, shore and river bank features andriver conditions were assessed visually. Mugger counts3334Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–3341

Muggers in Vadodaraduring night were done using a search light. Thesecounts were carried out in the last week of January2010 involving the staff of Gujarat Forest Departmentand volunteers of a few local non governmentalorganizations (Appendix 2). Prior to initiating thesecounts, an orientation routine was conducted for allteam members briefing them on methodology. Mostof the Muggers were recorded following eye reflection.Data such as size, habitat type, water quality, riverside features, and anthropogenic activities in the areawere recorded visually and man-animal conflicts wererecorded opportunistically.Burrow count: Mugger burrows were locatedmanually during November 2008–January 2009.Burrows were categorised as active and inactive(abandoned) based on signs during repeated surveys.ResultsMugger count 2008–09: Counts of Muggersduring the day were carried out from the last week ofDecember 2008 to January 2009. In total, 81 Muggerswere counted within the 25km stretch of the riverstudied. This included 14 juveniles, 24 subadults and43 adults (over two meters). Data on Mugger countsat each section of the river and size class are given inTable 1. The highest of 36 Muggers was observed inriver Section-2.Mugger count 2010: During the night count, a totalof 155 Muggers were observed, which included 78adults. Section wise counts and size of Muggers areR. Vyasgiven in Table 1.Burrows count: In total, 40 burrows of Muggerswere observed during November 2008–January 2009,including 25 on the left bank and the rest on the rightbank of the river. Among them, 36 burrows wereactive (Table 2). The highest of 27 active burrowswere observed in Section-3. Only two burrows wererecorded in Section-4, the down-stream of the river.A River Front Project was initiated during 2009 bythe Vadodara Municipal Corporation. In the first phase,the river banks were cleared and widened to facilitatethe flow of water. Due to this, about 25% of burrowsgot blocked with loose soil. However, it was observedthat within a few weeks the Muggers had excavatednew burrows nearby.Food and feeding: It was found that Muggersactively foraged nocturnally (dusk to dawn). Duringthe study, Muggers were observed feeding on eightTable 2. Numbers of burrows observed in study area, RiverVishwamitri.Section no.Number of BurrowsRight Bank Left Bank TotalUsed +Unused = TotalUsed +Unused = TotalUsed +Unused= TotalSection-I 0 + 0 =00 3 + 2= 05 3 + 2 = 05Section- II 1 + 0 = 01 03 + 0 = 03 04 + 0 = 04Section- III 13 +1 =14 14 + 1 = 15 27 + 2 = 29Section- VI 0 + 0 = 00 02 + 0 = 02 02 + 0 = 02Total 14+ 1= 15 22 + 3= 25 36 + 4 = 40Table 1. The Vishwamitri River section and count of Mugger Crocodylus palustrisA - survey result December2008–January 2009Riverlength(km)The riversectionJuvenilemNumbers of AnimalsSub-adultAdultBig-size

Muggers in Vadodaraspecies of birds: Little Cormorant Phalacrocoraxniger, Indian Pond Heron Ardeola grayii, Cattle EgretBubulcus ibis, Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax,Red-wattled Lapwing Vanellus indicus, Black-wingedStilt Himantopus himantopus, White-breasted WaterhenAmauronis phoenicurus and Blue Rock PigeonColumba livia. Juveniles fed on frogs (Indian SkippingFrog Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis, Indian Bull FrogHoplobatrachus tigerinus) and invertebrates such asinsects and dragon flies.During this study, Muggers attacking domesticanimals such as goats, dogs and poultry were reportedon numerous occasions, which indicate dependency ofthis species on domestic livestock for food. Muggersalso scavenged on materials dumped in the river andon its banks (Image 2). On two occasions, this specieswas found scavenging on human carcasses and humanfoetuses thrown in to the river, probably by hospitalsindicating that the river is being used for dumpingmedical wastes as well.Human-Mugger conflicts: Muggers attackingpeople were observed on eight occasions during2008–2010; Five male victims, including a 12-yearold boy and three females of age group of 20–40 yearswere victims. Two attacks were noted within the citylimits and the rest (6) along the down stream of riverDhadhar-Vishwamitri. Six attacks happened whilethe victims were crossing the river and in the othertwo cases it was while washing clothes and operatinga motor for pumping water. Barring one record duringApril, all the other conflicts were observed duringR. VyasJune–September.Rescues: A total of 90 Muggers were rescuedduring this study including 25 juveniles, 25 subadults,27 adults (13 muggers measured over threemeter) (Fig. 1; Images 3 & 4). Monthly data showedthat a higher number of Muggers were rescued duringSeptember, August and November (Fig. 2). Therescued crocodiles were sent to the Forest Departmentfor release in suitable habitats. Prior to January 2009,the rescued crocodiles were released at Sayaji Sarovar,Ajwa Village and those rescued in subsequent yearswere released in the downstream of VishwamitriRiver.Nest and nesting success: Nine nests wererecorded in Section-3 of the river from 2008–2010;of them, five nests were predated and hatchlingsemerged successfully from the other four. However,hatchlings and juveniles contributed about 17% and20% of the sampled population during 2009 and 2010,respectively. Of the three nests observed during2009, 22 hatchlings emerged from two nests, found inSection-3 of the river (Image 5).Threats: Threats to crocodiles include loss,© Raju Vyas© Pritesh PatelImage 3. A rescued Mugger with injury, inset close-up ofinjured foot.© Raju VyasImage 2. A large Mugger crocodile feeding on an animalcarcassImage 4 . An injured juvenile Mugger rescued from theVadodara City.3336Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–3341

Muggers in VadodaraR. VyasFigure 1. Size class of Muggers rescued from Vadodara City during 2008–2010 by Forest Department (FD)) and NonGovernmental Organizations.GSPCA - Gujarat Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to the Animals; LRCCT - Let. Rohan Crocodile Charitable Trust;OI - Others Individuals).© Vishal Thakur & Viral RoyImage 5. Mugger hatchlings.Image 6. An adult Mugger killed by rail traffic nearVishwamitri Railway Station, Vadodara© Manoj ThakarJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–33413337

Muggers in VadodaraR. VyasFigure 2. Mugger rescue in different months from Vadodara City during 2008 to 2010.alteration and erosion of habitats, along with newdevelopments in the river and its close vicinity.Recently, a few Muggers were killed in road and railtraffic (Image 6).DiscussionMuggers in river Vishwamitri is one uniqueexample of man living in harmony with animals. Thetwo decades of Mugger count has shown an increasingtrend in its population. Data on the status of Muggersof river Vishwamitri during January 1987 to December2007 is summarized in Vyas (2010a). The ‘night count’is relatively a better method to assess the population ofMugger compared to surveys during day.A total of 40 burrows were counted in 2009, of which36 were active. Among them, the highest number of29 burrows and 26 animals was observed in Section-3of the river. The number of burrows positivelycorresponded with the number of animals counted inthe same river section. This is similar to the report byNathalie (2011) on C. niloticus in River Tapoa, Niger.Prior to 1995, there were only nine burrows along thisriver stretch (Vyas 2010b), which increased four foldduring this study. During the riverfront project about25% burrows were damaged, but new burrows withina few weeks shows the adaptability of Muggers withrespect to a changing environment.Nonperennial and polluted rivers in general donot support rich fish fauna round the year. Therefore,crocodiles were forced to feed on various species, bothlive and dead animals. Observations of crocodilesfeeding on discarded medical wastes such as humanbody parts and foetuses are alarming and this shouldbe stopped.Most of the human-crocodile conflict was observedduring June–September, which is the breeding seasonof the species (Vijaykumar 1997). Crocodiles areknown to be aggressive during the breeding season andoften attack the intruder. Including the present study,a total of 22 attacks have been reported from 1985to 2010 (Vyas 1993, 2005, 2010a; Whitaker 2008).The trend in Mugger attacking humans has increasedover the years (Fig. 3), which requires attention of theconcerned department, and further study is required topropose mitigation plans.Mugger counts during 2010 showed adultcrocodiles over two meters contributed about 50%,which indicates a healthy population of this species3338Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–3341

Muggers in VadodaraR. VyasNonfatalTotal AttackFatalPower (Total Attack)Figure 3. The trend in Mugger attacking humans has increased over the year, Vishvamitri River System, Gujarat, India.in Vishwamitri River. However, continuous increaseof a largely carnivorous species in close proximity tohuman habitation is a matter of concern. It is hightime to design an action plan for this species at thestate level and to evaluate the existing conservationstrategy and reformulate the policies (Vyas 2010a),if required. Every year numerous Muggers are beingrescued from urban areas of the city and translocatedwith the involvement of various NGOs and staff of theState Forest Department. While the interest of localsin crocodilian conservation is appreciable, lack ofappropriate ‘rescue and release’ protocols is a matterof concern. A few translocated animals returnedto the same river stretch from where they had beenrescued earlier (Bhatt 2000; Vyas 2010b). Appropriatemeasures should be taken to protect Muggers fromgetting killed by vehicular traffic such as rail and road(Vyas & Bhavsar 2009; Vyas 2011), which are newthreats faced by this species.This small and dense population of Mugger survivesin the kernel of Vadodara, Gujarat, India is a notableexample of crocodilian conservation and man-muggerconcordance. The preservation of this population nowlies in the hands of the residents of Vadodara City andvarious local government agencies, including the StateForest Department, Urban Development Authorityand Municipal Corporation, Vadodara. Continuousmonitoring of the population of this species is requiredas suggested by Vyas (2010a).REFERENCESBhatt, S. (2000). Croc recaptured on Gujarat, CSG Newsletter19(1): 9–10.Choudhary, B.C. & R.J. Rao (1982). Status survey ofCrocodile population, 44–46. In: Captive managementof crocodiles in India: A field Guide. Central CrocodileBreeding and Management, Training Institute, Hyderabad.De Vos, A. (1982). A Manual on Crocodile Conservation andManagement in India. Foods and Agricultural OrganizationJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–33413339

Muggers in VadodaraR. VyasAppendix 1. Segment studied in Vishwamitri River and description of the area and characteristics of river banksRiverSegmentSection-1Boundary of theRiver SegmentNH-No. 8 Bridge toVUDA Circle+ Flood ControlCanalCo-ordinates73 0 12’48.67”E22 0 21’25.67”N73 0 11’42.61”E22 0 19’30.23”NSegmentlength8.5km(+1.0km)Features of the river BankThe river bank is undisturbed and covered withdistant agricultural fields, and southwards nearSama Village and VUDA circle area are therecently developed urban residential societies,EME school and training campus and a fewslums.ActivitiesFishing, washing andbathing. Also, river wateris used by farmers forirrigation and a numberof illegal liquor distilleriesare operated on thebanksSection-2VUDA Circle toKalaghoda Circle+ Flood ControlCanal73 0 11’42.61”E22 0 19’30.23”N73 0 11’20.18”E22 0 18’29.66”N3.5km(+1.0km)The river banks are covered with slums,gardens and zoo and urban residentialsocieties.One drainage (Bhukhi) empties on the leftbanks, which comes from the eastern sideareas of Chhani and Nizampura and thesecond drainage drains on the right bank, fromthe north-western slopes of city.Washing, bathing andsome illegal distilleriesare observed in thissegment too. Most of thebanks areas are usedby the slum dwellers fordefecation.Section-3Kalaghoda Circle toMunj Mahuda Bridge73 0 11’20.18”E22 0 18’29.66”N73 0 11’16.70”E22 0 17’08.03”N7.0kmBoth the banks are covered with slums, openscrub lands and a few residential societies.Left banks open scrub lands and society.One drainage pours into the right bank, whichcomes from Akota area of city and the seconddrainage empties into the left bank of the river,this drainage assembles rain water from thepalace compound and city area.Washing and a few illegaldistilleries are operatedon the banksSection-4Munj Mahuda Bridgeto Vadsar Bridge73 0 11’16.70”E22 0 17’08.03”N73 0 10’07.72”E22 0 15’53.51”N6.0kmThe right river bank area is covered withslums, open scrub lands and few urbanhousing societies, whereas on the left banks;agricultural fields are found.A rain fed drainage merges into the river onthe left banks, this collects rainwater fromSursagar, Dandiya Bajar and Manjalpur.Washing and liquordistilleries (illegal). Also,river waters are pumpedby local farmers for theirrigation purpose.Appendix 2. List of government, non government organizations and individuals involved in rescuing wild animals in andaround Vadodara, Gujarat.1Name and address of organization Name of the contact person Contact numberSocial Forestry, Forest Department,New Anexie Building, Kothi, VadodaraConservator of ForestRFO-Sayajiaug (0265-27839542)RFO-Padra (02662-24196)RFO-Amod (02641-45359)2 Wildlife Circle - Forest Department, Kothi Office, Vadodara Conservator of Forest RFO-Harni (0265-2484499)3 Wildlife Circle- Bharuch, Forest Department Conservator of Forest RFO-Jambusar (02644-20294)4 Sayaji Baug Zoo, Maha Nagar Seva Sadan Vadodara Zoo Curator 0265-27840795 Fire Brigade, Maha Nagar Seva Sadan Vadodara. Chief Fire Officer 0265-2562010; 0256-243205067Vadodara Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to the Animals,Vadodara CityGujarat Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to the Animals,60-Kunj Society, Alkapuri, Vadodara8 Let. Rohan Crocodile Charitable Trust, Raopura, VadodaraSecretary 0265-6555552Secretary: Snehal R. BhavsarRaj BhavsarPresident & Project CoordinatorMr. Ashok Pawar / Rakesh V.91-982501111791-982531747291-99250581379 Wildlife Reused Trust, Vadodara President: Rajesh Kadam 91-966203928110 Canine Group, Vadodara City President: Vishal Thakur 91-982568396011 Mr. Rohit Vyas and Group, Vadodara City Mr. Rohit Vyas 91-999895402312 Mr. Kartik Upadhaya and Group, Vadodara. Mr. Kartik Upadhaya 91-942627007713 Mr. Pravin Maharaj, Padra, Vadodara Mr. Pravin Maharaj 91-93279602263340Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–3341

Muggers in Vadodaraof the United Nation, Field Document, i-iv+1–69pp.Gujarat Pollution Board (2008). River Vishwamitri WaterAnalysis Results from Gujarat Pollution Board: 2007-08,http://gpcb.gov.in/projects.aspNathalie, N. (2011). Population of Nile Crocodiles (Crocodylusniloticus) in the northern part of park W. Niger. CSGNewsletter 30(1): 4-6.Oza, G.M. (1975). Conservation of the crocodile in the SayajiSarovar lake, Baroda, India. Biology Conservation 7: 235–236.Vijaykumar, V. (1997). Evaluation of restocked Muggercrocodiles and its implication in long-term conservation andmanagement of the species in Gujarat, India. July, 1997.VII- 65pp. Gujarat Institute of Desert Ecology, Patwadi Naka,Bhuj-Kachchh, Gujarat (Unpublished Report).Vyas, R. (1993). Recent cases of man-eating by the Mugger(Crocodylus palustris) in Gujarat State. Hamadryad 18:48–49.Vyas, R. (2005). Recent notable incidences of conflict betweenMugger and humans in Gujarat. CSG Newsletter 24(2):7–8.Vyas, R. (2010a). Mugger (Crocodylus palustris) populationR. Vyasin and around Vadodara City, Gujarat State, India. RussianJournal of Herpetology 17(1): 43–50.Vyas, R. (2010b). The Muggers (Crocodylus palustris) ofVishwamitri River: Past and Present. Report. Herpetology& Environmental Research Project (HERP), Vadodara,India. 32pp, Figures 5, Tables 11, I-XX.Vyas, R. (2011). New threat on the Mugger (Crocodyluspalustris) population of Vadodara city, Gujarat, India. CSGNewsletter 30(3): 15–16.Vyas, R. & S.R. Bhavsar (2009). Movement of an individualMugger into urban areas of Vadodara City, Gujarat State,India. CSG Newsletter 28(3): 5–7.Vyas, R. & R. Vyas (2002). Mugger survey in the VishwamitriRiver of Gujarat, India. CSG Newsletter 21(3): 9–110.Whitaker, R. & H. Andrews (2003). Crocodile conservation,Western Asia region: An update. Journal of the BombayNatural History Society 100(2&3): 432–445.Whitaker, N, (2008). Survey of Human-crocodile conflict inGujarat and Rajasthan: Trial of conflict mitigation educationmaterials and further information on. Madras CrocodileBank Trust, 30pp. (Unpublished Report).Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3333–33413341

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3342–3348Rapid assessment of Wreathed Hornbill Acerosundulatus (Aves: Bucerotidae) populations andconservation issues in fragmented lowland tropicalforests of Arunachal Pradesh, IndiaC. Murali Krishna 1 , Kuladip Sarma 2 & Awadhesh Kumar 31,2,3Department of Forestry, North Eastern Regional Institute of Science & Technology (Deemed University), Nirjuli, PapumpareDistrict, Arunachal Pradesh 791109, IndiaEmail: 1 murali7murali@gmail.com, 2 kldpsarma306@gmail.com, 3 tpileatus@gmail.com (corresponding author)Abstract: A rapid assessment of Wreathed Hornbills, theirdistribution and abundance was carried out in fragmentedlowland tropical forests of Lower Dibang Valley District,Arunachal Pradesh, northeastern India from October 2010 toApril 2011 using the total count method. A total of 62km distancewas covered on foot to survey four study sites: Horupahar, Delo,Koronu and Injunu. Nine flocks of 172 hornbills were sighted.Aceros undulatus flock size ranged from 8–38 individuals with amean of about 19.1±2.6. Illegal logging, hunting for bushmeatand other body parts (feathers, beak etc.) for decorating thehead gear and house interiors by the local tribals were observedas the major threats to the species in the study areas.Keywords: Aceros undulatus, encounter rate, habitatencroachment, illegal logging, local hunting.Date of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: Shumpei KitamuraManuscript details:Ms # o2969Received 18 October 2011Final received 23 July 2012Finally accepted 14 October 2012Citation: Krishna, C.M., K. Sarma & A. Kumar (2012). Rapid assessmentof Wreathed Hornbill Aceros undulatus (Aves: Bucerotidae) populationsand conservation issues in fragmented lowland tropical forests of ArunachalPradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3342–3348.Copyright: © C. Murali Krishna, Kuladip Sarma & Awadhesh Kumar2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allowsunrestricted use of this article in any medium for non-profit purposes,reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authorsand the source of publication.Acknowledgements: The authors express their sincere thanks to thePCCF-Wildlife, Itanagar for giving us necessary permission to carry out ourresearch, and Mr. Umesh Kumar, Divisional Forest Officer, Mehao WildlifeSanctuary for his valuable logistic support during the field work. Gratefulthanks are also due to Director, NERIST and Dr. C.L. Sharma, AssociateProfessor & Head, Department of Forestry, NERIST, Arunachal Pradeshfor their administrative supports. We also would like to thank Dr. AparajitaDatta, Nature Conservation Foundation (NCF) for clearing the doubtsregarding the species identification and distribution. Also, we would liketo thank Mr. Raju Barthakur, Assistant professor, NERIST for keeping thepaper free from grammatical errors. Last but not the least; we would like tothank the field assistants Biron J. and Agomena for helping us in the fieldand NRDMS, DST, Government of India for providing financial assistantto carried out this work.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:956F430A-F3AE-4339-A951-C248C9460EACOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADMany species of hornbills are under the threat ofextinction because they are specialised with regardto habitat, food and nesting sites. They play a veryimportant role in the forest ecosystem as seed dispersers(Kinnaird 1998; Whitney & Smith 1998; Kitamura etal. 2008; Balasubramanian et al. 2011). Nine speciesof hornbills have been recorded from India, of whichfive species are recorded from the tropical forests ofArunachal Pradesh (Datta 1998; Selvan 2010). Amongthese five species, the Wreathed Hornbill Acerosundulatus, also known as the Bar-pouched WreathedHornbill (Images 1 & 2), is threatened by illegalselective logging, habitat encroachment and localhunting pressure in unprotected tropical forestlands inLower Dibang Valley District of Arunachal Pradesh(Kumar et al. 2011).The distribution of the A. undulatus ranges fromnortheastern India, Bangladesh, Bhutan, BruneiDarussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’sDemocratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailandand Viet Nam (BirdLife International 2009). In general,hornbills feed mostly on figs. However, A. undulatusis more of a generalist frugivore when compared withthe other species of hornbills such as the Great Piedand Brown Hornbill (Datta & Rawat 2003). Hornbillsare widely hunted by the Adi and Idu Mishmi tribals ofArunachal Pradesh for bushmeat. Hornbill body partssuch as beak and feathers are also used in traditionalculture as headgear decorations (Solanki et al. 2004;Riba 2012), and parts are even displayed in the housesby the tribal population as trophies (Datta 2002). Thelocal communities of Mehao have a long tradition ofhunting which is a major threat to wildlife in the studyarea (Chetry et al. 2010). Aceros undulatus is listedas Least Concern under IUCN (BirdLife International3342Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3342–3348

Wreathed HornbillM. Krishna et al.© Murali Krishna © Murali KrishnaImage 2. Female Wreathed Hornbills in flightImage 1. Male Wreathed Hornbills on resting.not fall under any category of protection. Adis andIdu Mishmis are the major tribes who dominate thestudy area and generally cultivate agricultural cropslike Mustard Sinapis alba, Maize Zea mays, GingerZingiber officinale and Turmeric Curcuma longafor their livelihood, in open fragmented areas which2012) and as Schedule-I species of the Indian Wildlife(Protection) Act (1972) (Anonymous 1994).The present study tried to assess the currentpopulation status and conservation issues ofA.undulatus in fragmented lowland tropical forest ofLower Dibang Valley District of Arunachal Pradeshand also to highlight the importance of speciesconservation.Materials and MethodsStudy area: Four sites with fragmented forestswere chosen namely Delo (95 0 54’E & 28 0 02’N),Koronu (95 0 55’E & 28 0 01’N), Horupahar (95 0 53’E &28 0 01’N) and Injunu (95 0 51’E & 28 0 02’N) which lieadjacent to the Mehao Wildlife Sanctuary of LowerDibang Valley District of Arunachal Pradesh (Image3) with an elevation range between 200–275 m. Thestudy sites do not have fixed boundaries which made itdifficult for us to calculate the area of each study siteand all the sites are inhabited. The fragmented forestsof the study area consisted of tropical semievergreenvegetation dominated by tree species such asNeolamarckia cadamba, Ailantus grandis, Bischofiajavanica, Duabanga grandiflora, Dipterocarpusmacrocarpus, Erythrina suberosa, Ficus sp. and doMehao WLSMehao WLSStudy areaForest patchDibang RiverImage 3. The locations of the study sites.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3342–33483343

Wreathed Hornbillwere created after selective logging and habitatencroachment.Population survey and estimation: The studywas conducted from October 2010 to April 2011.Total count method was employed to conduct rapidpopulation assessment as it is the best method foraccessing flock forming birds (Colin et al. 1998;Javed & Rahul 2002). All the birds found roosting ontrees along the trail during the survey were taken intoaccount and flying birds were ignored. Repeat surveyswere conducted on each survey month (October,December 2010 and February, April 2011) for threesubsequent days between 05:30–11:00 hrs (Appendix1). An assumption was made before conducting thesurvey: “That the flocks were never recounted on thesame day of the survey”. A total of 62km of distancewas covered in all four study sites 14km in Horupahar,19.5km in Delo, 15km in Koronu and 13.5km in Injunu.All the individuals of Aceros undulatus sighted alongthe trail were recorded for total flock size as well astree species on which they were sighted. The flockssighted were grouped together by placing differentflocks of almost same flock size or a same group onconsecutive survey days. In case an area had two ormore flocks with the same flock size, then the flockswere placed randomly on the data sheet for populationanalysis. The flock size and the number of flockssighted on each survey were noted and the mean sizeof the flock and mean flock numbers were calculatedat the end of the survey.Estimation of vegetation parameters: Vegetationanalysis was done by counting the number of trees inthe trails followed. A total of nine trails were usedfor collecting the data. Trails were laid randomly inthe study area and the length of the each trail wasmaintained constant at 1 km with a width of 20m. Girthat breast height (GBH) was not recorded during thetime of the study as all the flocks that we encounteredwere observed on the trees having ≤ 150cm GBH, alsoonly large trees above 100cm GBH were left after theclearing of the area for the purpose of agriculture.Also, we recorded a number of cut stumps in the trailsin order to evaluate the illegal logging pressure of thearea. Fig trees that had fallen on the trail were alsocounted.Questionnaire survey: A rapid questionnaire surveywas employed and 18 people were interviewed in thestudy sites to get their quick response on the methodsTable 1. Details of Wreathed Hornbill flocks sightedStudy areaAverage No. offlock recordedin study siteDelo 02Horupahar 03Koronu 03Averageflock size24 Ficus sp.M. Krishna et al.Mostly sighted ontree species12 Bischofia javanica14 Ficus sp.11 Ficus sp.20 Ficus sp.21 Canarium sp.34 Ficus sp.20 Bischofia javanicaInjunu 01 16 Bischofia javanicaTotal 09 172Average 19.1Table 2. Habitat status of study areaAreaNo. of treesrecordedper kmNo. of figplants perkmNo. of cutstumps perkm1 Delo 44.0 2.0 1.82 Horupahar 40.6 2.3 2.43 Koronu 36.6 3.2 1.74 Injunu 20.6 3.3 1.5Table 3. Details of hunting of Wreathed Hornbills by localsName ofthe VillageNo. ofhuntersInterviewedApproximateno. of hornbillshunted duringmigratoryseasonLocal gunspreferredfor huntingCatapultspreferredforhuntingDelo 6 15–20 5 1Horupahar 6 15–20 6 NilKoronu 3 10–15 3 NilInjunu 3 10–15 2 1Total 18 50–70 16 2of hunting, number of hornbills hunted every season,preferences of hornbill species for hunting and usepattern of hornbill such as for cultural, bushmeat ortrade. The survey was conducted mainly during theevenings when the locals were free from work andonly men were interviewed in the study as femaleswere never involved in hunting.ResultsPopulation status: We estimated a minimum of172 individuals of Aceros undulatus in nine flocks3344Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3342–3348

Wreathed Hornbillduring the study (Table 1) in particularly logged andfragmented forest areas. The average flock size wasestimated as 19.1±2.6, ranging from 8-38 individuals.Conservation status: Vegetation and logging: Treedensity was highest in Delo (44 trees/km trees followedby Horupahar (40.6 trees/km), Koronu (36.6 trees/km)and Injunu (20.6 trees/km) (Table 2). Fig tree densitywas highest in Injunu (3.3 individuals/km) and waslowest in Delo (2 individuals/km). Illegal selectivelogging was commonly observed in the study area fortimber, firewood, house construction materials, etc.Logging was highest in Horupahar (2.4 cut stumps/km) followed by Delo (1.8 cut stumps/km), Koronu(1.7 cut stumps/km) and Injunu (1.5 cut stumps/km)was the least (Table 2; Images 4 & 5).Hunting: According to the responses drawn fromthe local people through rapid interviews, overall50–70 Aceros undulatus are hunted throughout theirmigratory period, i.e., in winter in the study sites(Table 3) which probably could be an over estimate.The number of hornbills hunted varied in each siteranging from 10–20 individuals. Most of the hornbillsare hunted as a part of sport hunting and the meat of thebird is consumed as food. The hunted hornbill meatwas never observed for sale in the local markets asit is usually shared within the family and community.The gizzard of the hornbill was used in some localmedicines for curing stomach disorders. The feathersand skulls of the birds are used as decorative itemsin the houses by Idu Mishmis and Adis. Guns arepreferred (88%, n=16) over catapults (12%, n=2) bythe local people for hunting hornbills due to the highsuccess rate (Image 6).DiscussionPopulation: We estimated the minimum populationas 172 individuals of 9 flocks in the study area. ThoughM. Krishna et al.this may not indicate the exact population of the A.undulatus in the given area, still an estimate can bemade. Finding the exact estimates of such nomadicflock forming birds is a difficult task. A. undulatususually live in huge flocks both in breeding and nonbreedingseasons (Kinnaird & O’Brien 2007). Flocksize of upto 1000 individuals of A. undulatus wasalso recorded in Thailand’s Khao Yai National Park(Poonswad & Kemp 1993). However, the small flocksize in the study area might be due to unavailability offood resources and hunting.Effect of logging and fig tree density: The data thatwe collected during the study was very limited thusdrawing assumptions based on it might be difficult tointerpret. Datta (1998) stated that logging does notaffect the distribution pattern of the species as they arenomadic in nature. Our results have also shown thesame. Logging at a rapid phase in the study area hascreated huge gaps in the vegetation thus the hornbillswere easily sighted (Image 7). Rijksen (1978) statedthat fig densities determine the hornbill abundance ofa given area. However, fig densities did not have anyimpact on the species as A. undulatus is a nomadicspecies and tend to travel large distances betweenfeeding sites and the roosts during the breeding season(Leighton 1986). Mostly fig trees in the study areawere used as roosting sites by the species. At times,observations were made where A. undulatus fed on thefigs as well.Conservation issuesHabitat fragmentation leads to accessibility offorest resources and thus facilitates easy hunting ofwildlife species (Robinson et al. 1999). High degreeof forest fragmentation due to anthropogenic practicessuch as selective logging, agricultural practices hasdeteriorated the forest quality in the present study areas© Awadhesh Kumar© Awadhesh Kumar© Murali KrishnaImage 4. Illegal logging in study area.Image 5. Forest cutting for firewoodImage 6. Hunting of hornbill for foodJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3342–33483345

Wreathed HornbillM. Krishna et al.© Murali Krishna © Murali Krishna © Awadhesh KumarImage 7. Degraded open forest instudy areaImage 8. Selective logging for timberImage 9. Nyshi Headgear decoratedby beak of Wreathed hornbill.(Image 8). This led to easy sighting of hornbills forhunters making the species more vulnerable. Hornbillspecies are hunted for their casque and feathers (Rohit2008). Mishmis and Adis usually hunt hornbills formeat and their body parts (skull, feathers, casque, etc.)and these are exhibited as trophies in their living roomand also used in decorating their headgear. Bucerosbicornis is the preferred hornbill species over Acerosundulatus for hunting in Arunachal Pradesh (Datta2002; Kumar et al. 2011) due to their high demandin the local market for headgear decoration (Image9). The beak of B. bicornis is mostly used to decoratethe headgear of the Nyishi tribe. The only reason fortargeting A. undulatus in the study area by the tribalsis that, it is the only hornbill species found in the studyarea.Based on the responses received from the villagersby comparing the past and present abundance ofspecies, it was evident that A. undulatus population isdeclining in the area. It may be due to high huntingand habitat loss in the study sites. Habitat loss wasobserved due to increasing agricultural practices tocultivate cash crops such as Sinapis alba, Zea mays,Zingiber officinale and Curcuma longa in the studyarea (Images 10 & 11). In addition to agriculturalpractices, illegal logging of mature trees, which actas roosting sites for A. undulates, were also observedduring the study period. The poor regeneration of plantspecies in Koronu and the absence of regenerationof the preferred tree species (Ficus sp.) in the otherthree sites could be the reason for the declining naturalseed dispersers. Kitamura et al. (2008) stated thatA. undulatus are primarily scatter dispersers duringthe day in the moist evergreen forest and act as keystone species for preserving the forest ecosystem.Balasubramanian et al. (2011) has supported thishypothesis by explaining the role of Indian GreyHornbill in the regeneration of Santalum album inTamil Nadu, India. Similarly, Whitney & Smith(1998) also stated that hornbill densities in primaryand secondary forests of central Africa suggested thatthey are important agents of seed dispersal in bothhabitats. Kinnaird (1998) also explained that the RedKnobbed Hornbills effectively dispersed seeds ofseveral tropical trees thus influencing the initial fate ofseeds in the regeneration process of the forests.Logging and hunting, if continued in the samephase will definitely affect the population of A.undulatus leading to local possible extripation in thenear future from the study area. So, certain measureshave to be taken by the forest department and thegovernment by bringing awareness among the localcommunities explaining to them the importance ofhornbills for conservation and preservation of forestecosystem in addition to ensuring a continuous supplyof forest resources to the local inhabitants themselves.Thus, to conserve the hornbill on a sustainable basis,keeping the feeding and behavioural ecology ofA. undulatus in mind, large areas of disturbed andfragmented lowland tropical forests in the study siteshave to be restored with tree species which could fulfilthe basic needs of the local society as well as wildlifein general and A. undulatus in particular. A. undulatusare more generalized feeders during the non-breedingseason (Datta 2001; Datta & Rawat 2003) and theycan survive in human dominated landscape as per thegeneral observations. Thus, the population of hornbillswill stay least affected and will thrive in its migratoryhabitats in future.3346Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3342–3348

Wreathed HornbillM. Krishna et al.© Chuku Loma© Chuku LomaImage 10. Local people polughing his fild after cuttingforest.Image 11. Ginger crop cultivated in study area.ReferencesAnonymous (1994). The Indian Wildlife Protection Act, 1972(as amended upto 1993). 2nd Edition. Natraj Publishers,Dehra Dun, 158pp.Balasubramanian, P., R. Aruna, C. Anbarasu & E.S. Kumar(2011). Avian frugivory and seed dispersal of IndianSandalwood Santalum album in Tamil Nadu, India. Journalof Threatened Taxa 3(5): 1775–1777.BirdLife International (2012). Aceros undulatus. In: IUCN2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version2011.2. . Downloaded on 20 January2012Chetry, D., R. Chetry, K. Ghosh & A.K. Singh (2010). Statusand Distribution of the Eastern Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolockleuconedys) in Mehao Wildlife Sanctuary, ArunachalPradesh, India. Primate Conservation 25: 87–94.Colin, B., M. Jones & S. Marsden (1998). Expedition FieldTechniques - Bird Surveys. Published by the ExpeditionAdvisory Centre, Royal Geographical Society, London,136pp.Datta, A. (1998). Hornbill abundance in unlogged forest,selectively logged forest and a forest plantation in ArunachalPradesh, India. Oryx 32(4): 285–294.Datta, A. (2001). An ecological study of sympatric hornbills andfruiting patterns in a tropical forest in Arunachal Pradesh.PhD Thesis, Saurashtra University, Rajkot, India.Datta, A. (2002). Status of hornbills and hunting among tribalcommunities in Eastern Arunachal Pradesh. UnpublishedReport.Datta, A. & G.S. Rawat (2003). Foraging patterns of SympatricHornbills during the non-breeding season in ArunachalPradesh, northeast India. Biotropica 35(2): 208–218.Javed, S. & K. Rahul (2002). Field methods for bird surveys.Bombay Natural History Society, Department of WildlifeSciences, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, and WorldPheasant Association, South Asia Regional Office (SARO),New Delhi, India, 21–25pp.Kinnaird, M.F. (1998). Evidence for effective seed dispersalby the Sulawesi Red-Knobbed Hornbill Aceros cassidix.Biotropica 30(1): 50–55.Kinnaird, M.F. & T.G. O'Brien (2007).The Ecology &Conservation of Asian Hornbills: Farmers of the Forest.University of Chicago press. pp143.Kitamura, S., T. Yumoto, N. Noma, P. Chuailua, T.Maruhashi, P. Wohandee & P. Poonswad (2008).Aggregated seed dispersal by wreathed hornbills at a roostsite in a moist evergreen forest of Thailand. EcologicalResearch 23: 943–952.Kumar, A., C.M. Krishna & K. Sarma (2011). Impact oflogging and fragmentation on population abundanceof Wreathed Hornbill Aceros undulatus and Great PiedHornbill Buceros bicornis and their conservation in lowlandtropical forests of Eastern Arunachal Pradesh, northeastIndia. Abstract Published in proceedings, Status of IndianBirds and Their Conservation, SACON. Nov 2011.Leighton, M. (1986). Hornbill social Dispersion: variationson a monogamous theme, pp. 181–196. In: Rubenstein,D. & R.W. Wrangham (eds.). Ecological Aspects of SocialEvolution. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Poonswad, P. & A.C. Kemp (1993). Manual on theConservation of Asian Hornbills. Hornbill Project Thailand.Bangkok, 513pp.Rijksen, H.D. (1978). A Field Study of The Sumatran Orangutan(Pongo pygmaeus abelii, Lesson, 1827): Ecology,Behaviour & Conservation. H. Veenman & Zonen,Wageningen, Holland.Riba, B. (2012). Aassessment of conservation efforts madefor protection and conservation of hornbill species inArunachal Pradesh, India. MSc Thesis, Department ofForestry, NERIST, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh, 32pp.Robinson, J.G., K.H. Redford & L. Bennett (1999). Wildlifeharvest in logged tropical forests. Science 284: 595–596.Rohit, N. (2008). Flight of the Great Hornbill. Red PandaNewsletter 1(3): 4.Selvan, K.B.M. (2010). Survival of Great Pied Hornbills inArunachal Pradesh. Current Sciences 99(5): 10.Solanki, G.S., P. Cutia & O.P. Singh (2004). Headgear- Acultural artefact and its implication on Biodiversity inArunachal Pradesh. Arunachal University Research JournalJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3342–33483347

Wreathed HornbillM. Krishna et al.Appendix 1. Showing the list of flocks sighted on different days of survey in different areas.DeloDateNo. of hornbillgroups observedObserved flock with numberof individuals25.x.2010 1 12 -26.x.2010 1 12 -27.x.2010 2 11 2602.xii.2010 2 12 2203.xii.2010 2 16 2604.xii.2010 2 11 2206.ii.2011 2 11 2307.ii.2011 2 10 2808.ii.2011 1 10 -02.iv.2011 2 11 2403.iv.2011 1 12 -04.iv.2011 1 12 -KoronuMean 11.6 24.4DateNo. of hornbillgroups observedObserved Flock with numberof individuals25.x.2010 3 20 32 2026.x.2010 3 21 33 1927.x.2010 2 21 3802.xii.2010 3 22, 34 2003.xii.2010 2 23 3604.xii.2010 2 23 2006.ii.2011 3 20 29 1907.ii.2011 2 21 2208.ii.2011 3 21 34 1802.iv.2011 3 22 36 1903.iv.2011 1 2004.iv.2011 1 34Mean 20.5 34 19.6HorupaharDateNo. of hornbillgroups observedObserved flock with numberof individuals25.x.2010 2 14 1626.x.2010 3 12 11 1727.x.2010 3 14 16 1802.xii.2010 3 11 14 2103.xii.2010 3 8 13 2004.xii.2010 1 2306.ii.2011 3 10 13 2007.ii.2011 1 1808.ii.2011 3 11 14 1902.iv.2011 2 12 1403.iv.2011 3 11 16 2104.iv.2011 0 14 16InjunuMean 11.4 14.5 19.8DateNo. of hornbillgroups observedObserved flock withnumber of individuals25.x.2010 1 1426.x.2010 1 1827.x.2010 1 1802.xii.2010 1 1603.xii.2010 1 1504.xii.2010 1 1706.ii.2011 1 1607.ii.2011 1 1408.ii.2011 1 1602.iv.2011 1 1703.iv.2011 - 1404.iv.2011 - 18Mean 16.17(1): 35–44.Whitney, K.D. & T.B. Smith (1998). Habitat use and resourcetracking by African Ceratogymna hornbills: implicationsfor seed dispersal and forest conservation. AnimalConservation 1: 107–117.3348Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3342–3348

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3349–3354Distribution, den characteristics and diet of the IndianFox Vulpes bengalensis (Mammalia: Canidae) inKarnataka, India: preliminary observationsH.N. Kumara 1 & Mewa Singh 2,31Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Anakatti Post, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641108, India2Biopsychology Laboratory, University of Mysore, Manasagangotri, Mysore, Karnataka 570006, India3Evolutionary and Organismal Biology Unit, Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research, Bengaluru, Karnataka, IndiaEmail: 1 honnavallik@gmail.com, 2 mewasingh@bsnl.in (corresponding author)Though historic accounts recognized four speciesof foxes from the Indian subcontinent (Pocock1936), more recent accounts indicate the occurrenceof only two species including the Indian Fox Vulpesbengalensis and the Red Fox V. vulpes with threedistinct subspecies of the Red Fox: the mountain form‘Tibetan Fox’ (V.v. montana), northern desert form‘Kashmir Fox’ (V.v. griffithii) and a western desertform ‘Desert Fox’ (V.v. pusilla) (Prater 1980). TheIndian Fox is the most common fox and it is known tohave a wide distribution extending from the foothillsof the Himalaya to the southern tip of peninsular India;Date of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Abstract: The Indian Fox Vulpes bengalensis inhabits relativelydry areas with scrub thorn forests, deciduous forests, shortgrasslands and marginal croplands. Since it is a widely distributedspecies, especially in the dry tracts, very little attention has beenpaid to it by researchers and wildlife managers. We conductedan extensive survey in the south Indian state of Karnataka todetermine the conservation status of the Indian Fox. We alsocarried out a more detailed observation in a small region called“Jayamangali Blackbuck Block” (JBB) and surrounding privatelands to study the den site characteristics of the species. Exceptfor a few districts in the Western Ghats and the west coastalregion, the fox was present throughout Karnataka. Relativelyhigher encounter rates were observed in regions with extensivegrasslands. We located 52 dens during the study in JBB whichprovide a minimum of 12dens/km 2 with 1.33/km 2 active dens.Circumference of den sites were smaller in JBB than in theadjoining private lands indicating that foxes frequently shifteddens in this area. The number of openings and active openingsincreased as the circumference of the den site increased.Fecal analysis revealed remains of certain species of plants,vertebrates and invertebrates, with arthropods as the major fooditems of the fox.Keywords: Den characteristics, diet, distribution, Indian Fox,Karnataka.Editor: A.J.T. JohnsinghManuscript details:Ms # o3046Received 24 December 2011Final received 31 October 2012Finally accepted 02 November 2012Citation: H.N. Kumara & Mewa Singh (2012). Distribution, dencharacteristics and diet of the Indian Fox Vulpes bengalensis (Mammalia:Canidae) in Karnataka, India: preliminary observations. Journal ofThreatened Taxa 4(14): 3349–3354.Copyright: © H.N. Kumara & Mewa Singh 2012. Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this articlein any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution byproviding adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: This study was supported by the Department ofScience and Technology, Government of India (Grant No. SP/SO/C-16/99)to Dr. Mewa Singh and Karnataka Forest Department to Dr. H.N. Kumara.We thank the Chief Wildlife Warden and the officials of the Karnataka ForestDepartment for permission to carry out this study and for assistance inthe field. Special thanks are due to Mr. A.K. Varma. We acknowledge thesupport of Raghunath Rao, Shanthala Kumar, Somashaker, H.P. Ashwinand N. Subhashchandra for helping us in the field. We thank ShanthalaKumar for preparing the map.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:94053D67-FB8D-4B8D-879C-F999A7EAA6EEOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADfrom Sindh province of Pakistan on the Western sideto southern Bangladesh on the eastern side (Johnsingh1978, 1986; Prater 1980).The Indian Fox is known to inhabit relativelydry areas, including scrub thorn forests, deciduousforests, short grasslands and marginal areas ofcroplands. The known range of the species fallswithin the biogeographical zones of desert (Zone 3),semi-arid (Zone 4) and the Deccan Peninsula (Zone6) of India (Rodgers et al. 2002). The Indian Fox hasbeen accorded the status of Schedule II in the Wildlife(Protection) Act, 1972 in India and classified globallyas ‘Least Concern’ by the IUCN Red List of ThreatenedSpecies (Johnsingh & Jhala 2007).Since the Indian Fox has a wide distribution and isconsidered as a relatively common carnivore in India,it has received little attention from both researchersand managers. Despite the few studies on its ecologyJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3349–3354 3349

Indian Fox in Karnatakaand behavior (Johnsingh 1978), population estimationin Rollapadu Wildlife Sanctuary in Andhra Pradesh(Manakadan & Rahmani 2002), resource utilization(Home 2005), distribution in southern India (Vanak2005) and habitat selection (Bhaskaran 2006), thebiology and conservation status of the Indian Foxis poorly known. Vanak (2005) in a survey of foxin southern India included only five districts ofKarnataka. In this paper, we present preliminaryobservations on the distribution of Indian Fox, its densite characteristics and diet in the state of Karnataka.Study areaWe conducted the present study in the southernIndian state of Karnataka, which is located between11 0 31’–18 0 45’N & 74 0 12’–78 0 40’E. Karnatakacovers a total area of 191,791km 2 . Rainfall in thisstate gradually declines from west to east resulting indifferent forest or habitat types. The state receives amean annual rainfall of 1,975mm ranging from 450mmin the drier plains on the eastern side to 7,500mm inthe Western Ghats on the western side. Karnatakahas been divided into four ecozones including coastalKarnataka with mangrove forests, hill region (theWestern Ghats) with rainforests and moist deciduousforests, southern plateau and northern plateau withdeciduous forests, scrub forests and open grasslands(Prasad et al. 1978; Karanth 1986). We studied theden site characteristics at ‘Jayamangali BlackbuckBlock’ (JBB) near Maidanahalli in Madhugiri Taluk,Tumkur District. The area of this block was about3km 2 , which lies between 77 0 18’–77 0 20’E & 13 0 44’–13 0 16’N. The area has mainly grasslands with fewthorny shrubs, and some monoculture plantations ofAcacia auriculiformis and Eucalyptus grandis. It is anarea meant for the protection of Blackbucks Antelopecervicapra. The area receives 400–500 mm of rainfallper annum and harbours 400–550 blackbucks.MethodsThe study was carried out from January 2002 toJuly 2006. During this period, we traveled acrossdifferent ‘taluks’ of all the ‘districts’ of the state, eitherby jeep or by motorcycle. We carried out a vehicularroad survey of 9,853km for direct sightings of foxes.During this survey, we also informally interviewedover 1400 people including forest departmentofficials, shepherds, local sheepherders, villagers andH.N. Kumara & Mewa Singhothers interested in wildlife. We collected secondarydata through interactions with people on the possibleoccurrence of the species in each taluk. If more than50% of the people in a taluk gave a positive responseregarding the occurrence of the fox, we consideredthe fox as ‘present’ in the taluk. We also collectedinformation on the occurrence of den sites, and if theden site was close by, we visited it for confirmation andattempted to sight the fox. We based den classificationas per Johnsingh (1978) into three types: simple shortdens, complex cavernous dens, and dens under rocksand we followed the same classification. We conducted644km of night surveys for foxes that included drivingand walking transects in open scrub forests, grasslandsand marginal cropland areas in 12 districts. Duringa driving survey, a researcher spotlighted from atopa jeep moving at a speed of 5–10 km/hr, and duringwalks we used a handheld flashlight to spot foxes. Wealso made walks in many other districts of the westerncoast and the Western Ghats. Since there was neithersecondary information nor direct sightings of the foxin these districts, details on these sampling efforts arenot provided. We also attempted direct sightings byflushing foxes from some active dens.We selected Jayamangali Blackbuck Block (JBB)to investigate specific details on the characteristics ofden sites and fox abundance. We selected 3km 2 of JBBand about 10km 2 of private area around this block forabundance estimates. The entire region was searchedthoroughly for the presence of all abandoned andactive dens of the foxes by a five member team duringMarch–April 2004. We recorded details on each densite that included status, distance from cropland, area,number of openings, number of active openings, andlength and width of each den opening. A total of 81droppings were collected from the JBB near the activedens, which were used to identify the food items.ResultsThere was no evidence for the occurrence of theIndian fox from the coastal region and forests of theWestern Ghats. The foxes were found in all the dryplains of Karnataka in the east, extending up to theeastern fringes of evergreen forests of the WesternGhats in the west and northern fringes of deciduousforests in the south (Fig. 1, Table 1). The populationdistribution was continuous with the fox populationsin the states of Maharashtra in the north, Andhra3350Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3349–3354

Indian Fox in KarnatakaH.N. Kumara & Mewa SinghTable 1. Occurrence of the Indian Fox in different districtsof KarnatakaNo.*DistrictOccurrence 1(evidence) 2Remarks1 Bidar P (2,3) Occur in all taluks2 Gulbarga P (1) Occur in all taluks3 Bijapur P (1) Occur in all taluks4 Bagalkot P (2,3) Occur in all taluks5 Belgaum P (1)Occur in all taluks, exceptsome parts of Khanapurtaluk6UttaraKannadaP (1)Occur only in Mundagodtaluk7 Dharwad P (2,3) Occur in all taluks8 Gadag P (2,3) Occur in all taluks9 Koppal P (2,3) Occur in all taluks10 Raichur P (2,3) Occur in all taluks11 Bellary P (1) Occur in all taluks12 Davangere P (2,3) Occur in all taluks13 Haveri P (1) Occur in all taluks0 200 kmIndian Fox presence areaIndian Fox absence areaFigure 1. Distribution of Vulpus bengalensis in Karnataka,India. Numbers inside the figure indicate revenue districts(see Table 1)Pradesh in the east and Tamil Nadu in the south.The present distributional range covers six protectedareas in Karnataka that include Daroji Bear Sanctuaryand Ranebennur Wildlife Sanctuary in the north,and Melkote Temple Wildlife Sanctuary, ArabithittuWildlife Sanctuary, Ranganathittu Bird Sanctuary andBannerghatta National Park in the south. Local peoplerevealed the occurrence of Indian Fox at the northernfringes of Bandipur Tiger Reserve and NagaraholeTiger Reserve. Though the foxes occur in the abovementionedwildlife protected areas, they are mostlyfound near the fringes and close to the croplands.We sighted a total of 36 foxes at night time duringthis study (Table 2). Most foxes were observedin Chikodi and Raibag of Belgaum District andMadhugiri in Tumkur District. All the sightings inboth regions were in the grasslands, and 78% (N=28)of the sightings were associated with the grassland.We identified 56 dens, 52 of which were in and14 Shimoga P (2,3)15 Udupi AB? -16DakshinaKannada17 Chikmagalur P (1)AB? -In Bhadravati, Shimoga,Shikaripur taluksIn Kadur, Chikmagalur andTarikere taluks18 Chitradurga P (2,3) Occur in all taluks19 Tumkur P (1) Occur in all taluks20 Hassan P (2,3)21 Kodagu AB? -In Belur, Hassan, Arasikere,HoleNarasipur andChandrayapattana taluks22 Mysore P (1) Occur in all taluks23 Chamarajnagar P (2,3) Occur in all taluks24 Mandya P (1) Occur in all taluks25 Bangalore P (1) Occur in all taluks26 Kolar P (1) Occur in all taluks* No.: Numbers depict the districts in the Figure 1.1P - Present; AB - Absent21 - Sighted; 2 - Den site and fecal deposit; 3 - Local informationaround the JBB in Madhugiri where we had intensivelyexplored the dens. Among the 52 dens, 36 were locatedin JBB and the other 16 were located in nearby privatecroplands and marginal areas. During our study, allthree types of dens were found in the study area. Oneden was in an abandoned quarry. Most of the densin the JBB were simple dens and only a few werecomplex dens. The minimum number of dens was 12/km 2 and 1.6/km 2 in JBB and private areas, respectively.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3349–33543351

Indian Fox in KarnatakaTable 2. Sight records of the Indian fox in different drierregions of the KarnatakaAreaKm coveredduring nightSightingsGulbarga 45 2 YadgirTaluks in whichsightedBijapur 26 1 Basavana BagevadiBelgaum 82 10 Chiokkodi and RaibagUttara Kannada 30 1 MundgodBellary 45 1 HospetHaveri 22 1 RanebennurChikmagalur 35 1 KadurTumkur 105 11 Madhugiri and SiraMysore 48 4 Mysore and HD KoteMandya 12 1 PandavapuraBangalore 102 1 HoskoteKolar 92 2 BagepalliTotal 644 36However, the minimum density of active dens in JBBwas 1.33/km 2 , whereas in the private areas it was 1.3/km 2 . Mean±SE den site area was 10.17±6.67 SEm 2 in JBB, which was significantly smaller (t=4.35,df=51, p

Indian Fox in Karnatakathe species may have a wider distribution. Since foxeslive in human dominated landscapes, they are alsoprone to infection by many diseases. Manakadan &Rahmani (2002) reported a sharp decline of foxes inRollapadu Wildlife Sanctuary in Andhra Pradesh andJohnsingh & Jhala (2007) reported a similar decline inparts of Gujarat, which were attributed to pathogens(Gompper & Vanak 2006).The diet of Indian Fox generally includes alarge variety of plants, invertebrates and vertebrates(Johnsingh 1978; Home 2005; Gompper & Vanak2006; Home & Jhala 2009). Though the same fooditems were identified in the present study also, the fecalsamples collected in a short span of 40 continuous daysfrom a small region in a single season may indicate theproportion of the diet content to be biased to a few fooditems. Our findings, however, are more similar to thosefrom Rollapadu Wildlife Sanctuary in Andhra Pradeshand Ranebennur Wildlife Sanctuary in Karnatakawhere 85% of scats contained remains of invertebrateswith large proportions of arthropods (Gompper &Vanak 2006). Plant remains and rodents were foundto be the next major food items in Karnataka, which isof a comparatively higher proportion than in the otherregions in India (Manakadan & Rahmani 2000; Home2005; Gompper & Vanak 2006). Since rodents formthe major part of its diet, Advani (1987) suggested thatthe Indian Fox plays a major role in controlling rodentpopulations. Centipedes, land crabs and bird eggswere also reported as food items in different regions(Pocock 1941; Prakash 1959; Johnsingh 1978; Prater1980; Manakadan & Rahmani 2002; Johnsingh &Jhala 2004).Johnsingh (1978) reported eight dens per squarekilometer, whereas in our study, the number variedfrom 1.6 to 12 dens per square kilometer. The numberof entrances varied from one to 36 in our study area,which is higher than the number of entrances reportedin Tamil Nadu (Johnsingh 1978). However, thenumber of entrances differed between the JBB andits surrounding area. This may be attributed to thedifference in the response to characteristics of thehabitat. Though the density of active dens did notdiffer between the JBB and private areas, the numberof passive dens in JBB was very high. Conversely, densite area was very high in private areas, which suggeststhat foxes frequently shift dens in JBB than in theprivate areas. However, Johnsingh (1978) suggestedH.N. Kumara & Mewa Singhthat the Indian Fox repeatedly uses ‘favorite’ den sitessuch as those among the cluster of large rocks as theyare largely safe from vandalism by humans that hasalso been reported for the Red Fox in North America(Murie 1944; Ables 1975). In private areas withcroplands, villages and regular movement of people,the denning habitat is probably lesser than in JBB.This may result in larger den sites with more entrancesin private areas. Several entrances are not uncommonamong foxes (e.g. many entrances were reported forthe Red Fox in North America (Murie 1944; Ables1975) and Arctic Fox (Alopex lagopus) (Chesemore1969).It often happens that species considered as commonwith a wide range of distribution do not receive thesame attention in management as compared to thoselisted as high priority species. We emphasize thatthese species also require adequate management.Vanak & Gompper (2010a,b) reported that though thefree ranging domestic dogs do not have a high foodniche overlap with the fox, they may prevent access tofoxes to the agricultural areas and grassland which arepreferred habitats of the fox; and dogs do kill foxes.Elimination of free-ranging dogs is a must if we wantto save many of our wildlife. We suggest that killing offoxes by people should be totally stopped and that thenumber of free-ranging dogs in fox habitats should becontrolled. Certain communities have the false beliefthat body parts of the fox kept at home bring wealthand these communities need to be educated. Alreadylocal extirpation of the fox has occurred in severalplaces and this needs to be arrested before the fox alsogains the dubious status of an endangered species.ReferencesAbles, E.D. (1975). Ecology of the Red Fox in North America,pp. 216–236. In: Fox, M.W. (ed.). The Wild Canids. VanNostrand Reinhold Company, New York.Advani, R. (1987). Rodent damage to various annual andperennial crops of India and its management, pp. 108–112.In: Eighth Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop.South Dakota, Rapid City.Bhaskaran, A. (2006). Modelling Habitat Selection of theIndian Fox (Vulpes bengalensis) in and around the GreatBustard Wildlife Sanctuary, Nannaj, Maharashtra. M.S.Thesis, The Manipal Academy of Higher Education(Deemed University), Karnataka, India.Chesemore, D.L. (1969). Den ecology of the Arctic Fox inJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3349–33543353

Indian Fox in KarnatakaNorthern Alaska. Canadian Journal of Zoology 87: 121–129.Gompper, M.E. & A.T. Vanak (2006). Vulpes bengalensis.Mammalian Species 795: 1–5.Home, C. (2005). Resource Utilization by the Indian Fox Vulpesbengalensis in Kutch, Gujarat. M.S. Thesis. SaurashtraUniversity, Rajkot, India.Home, C. & Y.V. Jhala (2009). Food habitas of the Indian Fox(Vulpes bengalensis) in Kutch, Gujarat, India. MammalianBiology 74: 430–411Johnsingh, A.J.T. (1978). Some aspects of the ecology andbehaviour of the Indian Fox Vulpes bengalensis. Journal ofthe Bombay Natural History Society 75: 397–405.Johnsingh, A.J.T. (1986). Diversity and conservation ofcarnivorous mammals in India. Proceedings of the IndianAcademy of Sciences (Suuplement): 73–89.Johnsingh, A.J.T. & Y.V. Jhala (2004). Indian Fox (Vulpesbengalensis), pp. 219-22. In: Sillero-Zubiri, M.H.C. &D.W. Macdonald (eds.). Canids: Foxes, Wolves, Jackalsand Dogs: Status Survey and Conservation. IUCN/SSC,Gland, Switzerland.Johnsingh, A.J.T. & Y.V. Jhala (2007). Vulpes bengalensis.In: IUCN 2010. 2010 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Downloaded on 23 December2011.Karanth, K.U. (1986). Status of wildlife and habitats inKarnataka. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society83: 166–179.Karanth, K.U. & M. Singh (1986). Dry zone afforestationand its impact on Blackbuck populations. Journal of theBombay Natural History Society (Centenary Proceedings):565–570.Manakadan, R. & A.R. Rahmani (2002). Population andecology of the Indian Fox Vulpes bengalensis at RollapaduWildlife Sanctuary, Andhra Pradesh, India. Journal of theH.N. Kumara & Mewa SinghBombay Natural History Society 97: 3–14.Murie, A. (1944). The Wolves of Mount Mckinley. U.S NationalParks. Fauna Series 5, Washington D.C., 232pp.Pocock, R.I. (1936). The foxes of British India. Journal of theBombay Natural History Society 39: 36–57.Pocock, R.I. (1941). Fauna of British India, including Ceylonand Burma. Mammalia. Volume II. Carnivora (continuedfrom Volume I), Suborders Aeluroidea and Arctoidea.Taylor and Francies, London, 503pp.Prakash, I. (1959). Food of some Indian mammals. Journal ofBiological Sciences 2: 100–109.Prasad, S.N., V.P. Nair, H.C. Sharathchandra & M. Gadgil(1978). On factors Governing the distribution of wildmammals in Karnataka. Journal of the Bombay NaturalHistory Society 75: 718–743.Prater, S.H. (1980). The Book of Indian Animals. BombayNatural History Society, Mumbai, 326pp.Rodgers, W.A., H.S. Panwar & V.B. Mathur (2002). WildlifeProtected Area Network in India: a review (ExecutiveSummary), Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 14–17pp.Vanak, A.T. (2005). Distribution and status of the Indian FoxVulpes bengalensis in southern India. Canid News 8: 1.Vanak, A.T. & M.E. Gompper (2010a). Dietary nicheseparation between sympatric free-ranging domestic dogsand Indian foxes in central India. Journal of Mammalogy90: 1058–1065.Vanak, A.T. & M.E. Gompper (2010b). Inteferencecompetition at the landscape level: the effect of free-rangingdogs on a mesocarnivore. Journal of Applied Ecology 47:1225–1232.Vanak, A.T., M. Irfan-Ullah & A.T. Peterson (2008). Gapanalysis of Indian Fox conservation using ecological nichemodeling. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society105: 49–54.3354Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3349–3354

JoTT Sh o r t Co m m u n ic a t i o n 4(14): 3355–3361Survey of the Fishing Cat Prionailurus viverrinus Bennett,1833 (Carnivora: Felidae) and some aspects impacting itsconservation in IndiaShomita Mukherjee 1 , Tiasa Adhya 2 , Prachi Thatte 3 & Uma Ramakrishnan 41Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Annaikatty Post, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641108, India2,3,4National Centre for Biological Sciences, GKVK Campus, Bellary Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560065, IndiaEmail: 1 shomitam@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 tiasaa@ncbs.res.in, 3 prachit@ncbs.res.in, 4 uramakri@ncbs.res.inThe Fishing Cat Prionailurus viverrinus is one of the15 felids that inhabit India (Nowell & Jackson 1996).Like the other small cats in the country, little is knownabout its ecology and conservation status. Existingknowledge on distribution and behaviour is based onobservations mainly done many decades ago (Pocock1939; Nowell & Jackson 1996; Sunquist & Sunquist2002), with only a few serious systematic efforts intoDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: Andreas WiltingManuscript details:Ms # o3199Received 13 May 2012Final received 21 September 2012Finally accepted 29 October 2012Citation: Mukherjee, S., T. Adhya, P. Thatte & U. Ramakrishnan (2012).Survey of the Fishing Cat Prionailurus viverrinus Bennett, 1833 (Carnivora:Felidae) and some aspects impacting its conservation in India. Journal ofThreatened Taxa 4(14): 3355–3361.Copyright: © Shomita Mukherjee, Tiasa Adhya, Prachi Thatte & UmaRamakrishnan 2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in any medium for non-profitpurposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to theauthors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: We thank Panthera Foundation, New York and WWFIndia, for funds to complete this study. We thank the forest departments ofAndhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengalfor permits for issuing permits and extending valuable help and hospitalityduring the survey. We thank the Director SACON and all staff, studentsand faculty for assistance and encouragement in letting this run smoothly.We thank NCBS and laboratory 3 members for collaborating and helpingwith logistics of lab work. We specially thank Mr Jairaj Singh and the TigerHaven Society for hosting and helping us during our visit to Dudhwa NationalPark, Mr. Joydeep Sarkar for hosting us on our visit to Corbett NationalPark and Ms. Shika Singh in Katarniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary. Severalindividuals and volunteers contributed towards the survey and withoutthem this would have been an impossible task. They are Ovee Thorat,Narayan Mondol, Ushneesh Das, Hindol Ahmed, Navya R, Arjan Basu Roy,Brikramaditya Roy, Dr. P. Manna, Arjen van’t Hof, Dayani Chakravarty, AdityaPanda, Shekhar Kolipaka, Kalpana. We specially thank Sonia Joseph forsequencing work.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7EC1D08D-85B7-4A52-BBC4-41BDBE5A1D64OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADAbstract: The Fishing Cat Prionailurus viverrinus is a mediumsized cat that is widely but patchily distributed across Asia andstrongly associated with wetlands. It is among the 15 felidspecies that inhabit India and like other smaller cat species itis very poorly understood. Apart from a few recent surveys inspecific locations, no concerted effort has been made to assessits current distribution and threats to its persistence within India.In this study we collected scats from natural habitats, throughsix states including five protected areas throughout India andperformed informal interviews with locals to get a better overviewof the current distribution and threats for Fishing Cats in India. Ofthe 114 scats used for molecular analysis, 37% were assignedto felids, including 19 Fishing Cats. We confirmed that FishingCat populations persisted in all locations where they wererecorded before, including Keoladeo Ghana, from where it wasreported in recent years that fishing cats are possibly extinct.Most populations face imminent threats with the worst being inthe Howrah District of West Bengal where 27 dead individualswere traced during the study period of only one year. The majorthreats across populations include ecologically unbalanced landpolicies and land uses, direct persecution due to human-FishingCat conflicts as well as ritual hunts. To address these threats werecommend a stronger dialogue among scientists, policy makers,administrators, locals and other stake holders such as commercialfish and prawn cultivators. Further awareness campaigns forstakeholders, and surveys for monitoring fishing cat populations,studying their ecology and estimating economic losses to localpeople due to the Fishing Cat predation on livestock and poultry,is needed in order to design effective conservation strategies.Keywords: Distribution, Felidae, Fishing Cat, India, moleculartools, survey, threats.determining their current distribution or status withinthe country (Kumara & Singh 2004; Kolipaka 2006;Datta et al. 2008). The Fishing Cat is included in theSchedule I of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act(Anonymous 1972) and listed as Endangered in the 2010assessment of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species(Mukherjee et al. 2010a), as throughout its range theFishing Cat habitat is severely threatened (Mukherjeeet al. 2010a). Fishing Cats are wetland specialists andearly accounts on their distribution in India suggestthat they occur around major wetlands and mangrovesAbbreviations: DNA - Deoxyribonucleic Acid; PCR - PolymeraseChain Reaction; NCBI - National Centre for Bioinformatics.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3355–3361 3355

Fishing Cat surveyacross the country (Pocock 1939; Nowell & Jackson1996). These ecosystems are highly threatened due tocompetition for resources with humans, such as land,water and fish. Several wetlands across India are rapidlybeing converted into agricultural land, fragmented ordestroyed, to meet the demands of a burgeoning humanpopulation (Prasad et al. 2002). In the 2010 IUCNassessment it was believed that the westernmost FishingCat population in India (in Keoladeo Ghana NationalPark, Bharatpur, Rajasthan) was already extinct sincethere were no reports for a couple of years (Mukherjee etal. 2010a; Bholu Abrar Khan pers. comm. 07 February2011).The distribution of the Fishing Cat is intriguing sinceit is widespread but patchy, from Bharatpur in Rajasthan,along the Himalayan foothills, through eastern Indiainto Andhra Pradesh (Pocock 1939; Nowell & Jackson1996; Sunquist & Sunquist 2002; Kolipaka 2006).With earlier records of the cat being largely restrictedto protected areas (Nowell & Jackson 1996), it was notknown if viable populations of this species occurredoutside protected areas. Further, details of threats tothe species and the current conservation status remainlargely unknown. Recent surveys (Kumara & Singh2004; Datta et al. 2008), through camera trapping andinterviews with locals, did not record Fishing Cats, butit remained unclear if this was a result of the crypticlifestyle of the species or if the absence is an indicationof its actual status. In this study we mainly focussedon the molecular analysis of non-invasively collectedfaecal samples to elucidate the presence of FishingCats.This paper is an overview of the current distributionand threats for Fishing Cats in India. We focussed onregions known to have Fishing Cat populations, inorder to update information on presence, persistenceand conservation status and did not aim to survey newpotential sites of presence.Material and MethodsThe study was conducted between April 2010 andMay 2011.Survey for presence through scat collection andanalysis: Field sampling for scats was done mainlyin the drier winter months from November 2010 toFebruary 2011, except for a site in Andhra Pradesh(Coringa mangroves) that was sampled in June 2010.The monsoon months (June to September) could not beS. Mukherjee et al.utilised for sampling since scats exposed to water oftendo not give good results due to fungal attacks or becausethe outermost layer containing intestinal cells is washedoff (Mukherjee et al. 2010b). The survey was conductedthrough the states of Andhra Pradesh (Coringa WildlifeSanctuary), Odisha (Mangalajodi), West Bengal(Howrah, Hooghly, Sundarbans, Jhargram), UttarPradesh (Dudhwa National Park, Katarniaghat WildlifeSanctuary), Uttarakhand (Corbett Tiger Reserve),Rajasthan (Keoladeo Ghana National Park) (Fig. 1).Within each locality sampled, scats were collectedfrom areas where the probability of locating FishingCat scats was high (areas with large water bodies andreed beds especially those that had culverts and bridgesclose by, since from earlier observations these wereareas marked profusely by Fishing Cats). Since in anygiven area several similar sized carnivores coexist,all potential carnivore scats were collected. Only asmall portion of the scat was collected, dried with ahair dryer on medium heat and intensity and courieredto the laboratory at the National Centre for BiologicalSciences where further analysis was conducted.DNA extraction was done using commerciallyavailable QIAmp (QIAGEN) stool and tissue kitswith minor modifications in incubation periods of themanufacturer’s protocol (see Mukherjee et al. 2007for details). All extractions were done in a separateroom, free from PCR products and any source ofcontamination. Controls were added to every extractionbatch to monitor contamination. We used the 16s rRNAfelid specific primers for species identification. PCRand sequencing protocols are described in Mukherjeeet al. (2010b). Sequences were aligned with the onlyreference sequence from GenBank (accession number:AF006451.1 GI:2218235) for species identification.Assessment of threats: A semi-structuredquestionnaire (Appendix 1) was used to interviewa total of 200 villagers (from Howrah and Hooghlydistricts of West Bengal) between 45–60 years of age.Ten people were interviewed from each village for atotal of 20 villages in order to assess potential threats ofFishing Cats. In Howrah, West Bengal, a more detailedexamination of threats was conducted by one of theauthors (Tiasa Adhya). She interviewed 20 people from38 villages of different age groups with around 40% ofthe interviewees falling in the age category of 30–50.Causes of deaths were collected through a network oflocal informers. In some cases the villagers who killed3356Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3355–3361

Fishing Cat surveyS. Mukherjee et al.Corbett, UttarakhandDudhwa / Katarniaghat,Uttar PradeshKeoladeo Ghana,RajasthanMangalajodi,OdishaHowrah / Hooghly /Medinapur / Sundarbans,West BengalCoringa,Andhra PradeshFishing Cat sampling locationsFigure 1. Locations of sampling for scatsthe cats themselves contacted the survey team and inmost cases (barring a couple) the dead Fishing Catswere photographed as evidence.ResultsSurvey for presence: In all, 151 scat samples werecollected from the surveyed regions including a tissuesample of a Fishing Cat that was killed by villagers inAima Village, Howrah District, West Bengal. SinceFishing Cats defecate in ‘latrines’ and several scats ofthe same individual can occur in a single location, weused just a single scat that provided results on the firstinstance. Hence, of the 151 scats collected from naturalhabitats DNA was extracted from 114. DNA extractsfrom 37 scats (32.5%) amplified with the felid specificprimers and results are listed in Table 1.PCR products of four scats failed to produce reliablesequences and thus were excluded from the analysis. Ofthe remaining, 19 were identified as Fishing Cat scatsand the rest were of Jungle Cat Felis chaus (N = 11) andLeopard Cat Prionailurus bengalensis (N = 3) (Table1). Fifteen of the 19 Fishing Cat scats were from WestBengal and the Terai region of Dudhwa/Katarniaghat.No Fishing Cat scat was located from Corbett NationalPark. The Fishing Cat scat located in Keoladeo GhanaNational Park, Bharatpur proved recent claims of itspotential extinction in this area wrong. Following thisrediscovery a Fishing Cat was observed not far from theJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3355–33613357

Fishing Cat surveyplace the scat was found (see discussion).Assessment of threats: Table 2 lists observed threatsfaced by Fishing Cats (potentially also other wildlifespecies) in the different study regions. Habitat lossattributed to land use policy and economic developments(commercial fisheries/aquaculture, brick industries,agriculture) are a major threat in some areas. In Kolkataa pair of Fishing Cats was captured in the vicinity of theInternational airport and is now housed in the KolkataZoo.Other threats were very specific to the region, suchas the red algae covering the wetlands of KeoladeoGhana. This is perceived to be a threat since thealgae forms a thick layer over the surface of the water,especially around the banks and completely obscuresvisibility. For the Fishing Cat that most likely requiresclear visibility around banks of water bodies to catchfish, this could be a severe problem.No conflict or killing was reported by villagers ofthe Terai belt of Dudhwa and Katarniaghat, despiteseveral reports of Fishing Cats occurring in sugarcanefields around the Tiger Reserve.In contrast 27 Fishing Cats were killed due tovarious human related causes (Table 3) in West Bengal,S. Mukherjee et al.26 from Howrah District and one from Hooghly. Themost common cause of death was from poisoning.DiscussionPresence and persistence: Despite surveying widelyand specifically at sites where the probability of FishingCat occurrence would be high, only 19 Fishing Cat scatswere obtained (Table 1). The survey period was shortand very widespread and hence intensive sampling ineach location was not possible. That is perhaps thereason why Fishing Cat scats were not found in CorbettNational Park. However, their presence in that regionis corroborated by a camera trap picture taken, veryrecently, by the Wildlife Institute of India (Dehradun)team (Abishek Harihar pers. comm. 25 March 2012).There are also technical reasons for low successsuch as some scats having very low amounts of predatorDNA. This is particularly relevant to scats collectedfrom within mangrove forests that have been exposedto the tide. This was perhaps the case with somescats collected in the Coringa mangroves that failedto produce results (Table 1). Nevertheless, the surveyserved as an overview since it established persistenceof the species in areas known to be within the broadTable 1. Summary of results of scat collection and identificationRegionScatscollectedExtractedfor DNA16srRNAamplification(% success)FishingCatJungleCatLeopardCatAndhra Pradesh: Coringa mangroves 10 10 2 (20%) 2 0 0 0West Bengal: Sundarbans, Hooghly,HowrahUttar Pradesh: Dudhwa & KatarniaghatTiger ReserveSequencefailed55 49 11 (22.4%) 7 1 0 336 30 12 (40%) 8 1 2 1Rajasthan: Keoladeo Ghana National Park 32 18 9 (50%) 1 8 0 0Uttarakhand: Corbett National Park 7 3 1 (33%) 0 0 1 0Odisha: Mangalajodi 11 4 2 (50%) 1 1 0 0Total 151 114 37 (32.5%) 19 11 3 4Table 2. Threats to Fishing Cat populations in various parts of their range (2010–2011).RegionAndhra Pradesh: Coringa mangrovesWest Bengal: Sundarbans, Hooghly, Howrah,MedinapurUttar Pradesh: Dudhwa & Katarniaghat Tiger ReserveRajasthan: Keoladeo Ghana National ParkOdisha: MangalajodiCurrent ThreatsCommercial aquaculture (prawn farms)Land use policy in urban and rural areas, conflict around villages (poultry/livestockdepredation), traditional hunting, poaching for meat and skin, agriculture, brick industries,commercial fisheries/aquaculture.SafeVery small population (only one record), extensive layer of red algae on water surfaceConflict around fishing villages3358Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3355–3361

Fishing Cat surveyTable 3. List of dead Fishing Cats encountered during thestudy periodDateCause ofdeathNumber ofindividualsVillageApr-10 Poisoning 3 WadipurApr-10 Poisoning 1 KushberiaApr-10 Strangulation 1 AimaApr-10 Trap cage 1 KashipurJun-10 Poisoning 1 TajpurJul-10 Trampling 1 GorchumukAug-10 Ritual hunt 3 JamdanaSep-10 Poisoning 1 KumargarhSep-10 Trap cage 1 MirzapurSep-10 Trap cage 1 MorshalOct-10 Ritual hunt 2 DeulpurNov-10 Poisoning 1 DelpurDec-10 Poisoning 3 KashipurJan-11 Poisoning 2 DeulpurFeb-11 Poisoning 1 UlugharaMar-11 Poisoning 1 BargramMar-11 Train 1 DankuniMar-11 Poisoning 1 MahishamuriMar-11 Poisoning 1 NuntiaTotal 27historical distribution range of the Fishing Cat.In some cases the survey established presence inareas that were unofficially known to have Fishing Catsbut were not reported or documented in detail anywheree.g. in the villages of Howrah and Hooghly districts ofWest Bengal. Hence the survey also helped compileinformation that is not available easily in publishedliterature. This is in some ways reassuring for anyconservation program since it indicates that Fishing Catdistribution is not as patchy as earlier believed. Thepresence of the species in agricultural landscapes bearsgreat potential for maintaining continuity of populationsacross their range in India. This is however, somewhatspeculative since information from Assam and parts ofAndhra Pradesh and Odisha are missing for estimatingreal physical connectivity in habitat. However, aphylogeographic study with adequate samples fromdifferent regions of India could reveal how isolatedFishing Cat populations are currently and also havebeen throughout the Holo and Pleistocene.Assessment of threatsGeneral threats: Rapidly changing land regimes andS. Mukherjee et al.policies that do not include ecological aspects seem tobe a general threat for this species across regions withinthe country. These land use changes vary among statesand these are outlined below along with other threats.West Bengal: The population in West Bengal inhuman dominated landscapes, outside protected areasseems to be under the most severe threat from multiplecauses. Land policies that do not consider ecologicaland conservation aspects are a major issue especiallyin and around Kolkata and suburbs which include thedistricts of North and South 24 Paraganas, Hooghly,Howrah and Nadia. South Kolkata which is now heavilydeveloped, is part of South 24 Paraganas (which alsoincludes the Sundarbans, the largest patch of contiguousmangrove forests in the world) and still has remnants ofwetlands and mangroves (e.g. around the InternationalAirport). The capture of a pair of Fishing Cats aroundthe airport a couple of years ago (Kolkata Zoo Directorpers. comm. 08 December 2010), indicates that thespecies still persists there but is perhaps under severethreat from rampant unplanned urbanisation. Sunquist& Sunquist (2002) report four Fishing Cats being killednear Kolkata in the late 1980s. They also mention thata century ago the species was abundant in this regionbut are very rare since the past few decades. Althoughurbanisation cannot be prevented, planning the spreadof cities by incorporating ecological aspects throughdialogue among scientists, policy makers and theadministration would be a step forward.In the Sundarbans, locals on Sagar Island talkedabout not seeing the Fishing Cat anymore and admittedto have exterminated the species themselves due toconflict (poultry and livestock depredation). Similarly,the records of 27 killings in a year, in just the Howrahand Hooghly districts of West Bengal, are alarmingsince these are only a few that were encountered andmany have very likely gone unnoticed and unreported.Though villagers state that the Fishing Cat causeslosses to them due to livestock and poultry depredationand also to fishing nets and fish stock, often the meresighting of the cat induces killing due to the cat’s habitof preying on livestock and poultry. These losses havenever been assessed or quantified economically.However, within the Sundarbans on the whole,Fishing Cats seem to be doing well and seem to berelatively common as they are also often trapped in cagesset up by the forest department in cases of livestockdepredation (Rishi Sharma pers. comm. NovemberJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3355–33613359

Fishing Cat survey2010; West Bengal Forest Department pers. comm. 26December 2010).Mushrooming brick industries are another threatin West Bengal and many wetland areas that werestrongholds for Fishing Cats are now being destroyedto accommodate these industries.Community level conservation efforts in privatelyowned lands are an option and this is being taken upthrough awareness campaigns through local NGO’sand interested individuals. However, this needs to besystematised for continual funding and monitoring forlong term gains.Andhra Pradesh: Introduction of aquaculture andprawn farms around the Coringa mangroves in AndhraPradesh (Ravishankar et al. 2004) is a potential threatto the Fishing Cat in the future. Such large aquacultureprojects are bound to attract species that feed on fishand prawns. Scats of Fishing Cat were found adjoininga huge commercial tiger-prawn farm just outside themangrove sanctuary and very likely Fishing Catsfeed on tiger-prawns there. So far there are no reportsretaliation, but this could also be due to ignorance ofthe presence of the cat that feeds in these commercialaquaculture farms. It is not known if this will be seenas conflict in the future as observed in villages in theHowrah District of West Bengal. One way to addressthis is to start sensitising locals and policy makersto the presence and importance of Fishing Cats andthe law protecting it, in the region and enforce strictimplementation of the law if killings are reported. Suchregions need to be regularly monitored by the forestdepartment to establish the presence of the cat so thatany retaliatory killing does not go unnoticed.Rajasthan: In the case of the Keoladeo Ghanapopulation, monitoring and surveys are requiredto investigate the possibility of individuals havingdispersed to the satellite wetlands around. Intensivesurveys in and around Keoladeo Ghana throughsampling scats and using molecular tools would providevaluable information on their presence, distributionand abundance. After communicating to the forestdepartment on the possible adverse impact of the redalgae, the management immediately started clearing offthe algae in some places.ConclusionAlthough the Fishing Cat was recorded in all regionswhere it occurred earlier, its situation in a large partS. Mukherjee et al.of its range is precarious. Especially the populationin West Bengal face numerous threats, which isparticularly concerning as this state, especially thesouthern districts, may be a stronghold for this species.Here a conservation programme should monitor thesepopulations and assess the impact of the observedthreats. Economic losses to locals have to be quantifiedto gauge their impact to the local economy. If the lossesare substantial urgent measures need to be taken toresolve it in order to minimise conflict. These can bein the form of insurance/compensatory schemes and/or changes in the way livestock and poultry are housed(Bhatnagar et al. 2002) and fish captures and nets shouldbe guarded or fenced. Of particular importance are alsosurveys in regions connecting known populations toensure habitat continuity. Here the satellite wetlandsaround Keoladeo Ghana in Bharatpur, the East coastwetlands and mangroves in the states of Odisha (e.g.Mahanadi), Andhra Pradesh (e.g. Krishna, Godavaribasins) and Tamil Nadu (e.g. Pulicat Lake, Pichavaramand Muthupet) are particularly important. Theoccurrence of the species along the Western Ghats isnot clear and needs investigation (Nowell & Jackson1996; Sunquist & Sunquist 2002) and there have beenno reports of this cat along the southern edge of theeastern coast of India.ReferencesAnonymous (1972). The Wild Life Protection Act, 1972.Professional Book Publishers, New Delhi.Bhatnagar, Y.V., V.B. Mathur & T. McCarthy (2002). A regionalper spective for snow leopard conservation in the IndianTrans Himalaya, pp. 57–76. In: Y.V. and S. Sathyakumar(eds.). Wildlife Institute of India ENVIS Bulletin. Bhatnagar.Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India.Datta, A., M.O. Anand & R. Naniwadekar (2008). Emptyforests: Large carnivore and prey abundance in NamdaphaNational Park, north-east India. Biological Conservation141: 1429–435.Kolipaka, S. (2006). Fishing Cat on India’s East Coast. CatNews 44: 22.Kumara, H.N. & M. Singh (2004). The influence of differinghunting practices on the relative abundance of mammals intwo rainforest areas of the Western Ghats, India. Oryx 38:321–327.Mukherjee, S., J. Sanderson, W. Duckworth, R. Melisch, J.Khan, A. Wilting, S. Sunarto & J.G. Howard (2010a).Prionailurus viverrinus. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List ofThreatened Species. Version 2011.2. .3360Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3355–3361

Fishing Cat surveyS. Mukherjee et al.Appendix 1. Questionnaire used for assessing threatsName –Age –Location –(Show pictures of fishing cat, jungle cat, otter, small Indian civet,palm civet to help them identify)A)1.2.a.b.c.3.a.b.c.4.a.b.c.d.e.5.Regarding Fishing CatWhat do you call Fishing Cat locally?How many times have you seen Fishing Cats in your lifetime?Never5-10 timesMore than thatHow many times have you seen Fishing Cats within oneyear?Never5-10 timesMore than thatWhen have you seen them?DawnMorningAfternoonDuskNightHave you seen adults or babies?B) Threats1. Have you ever killed Fishing Cats?Yes/No2.a.b.c.3.If yes, how many have you killed?01-3More than thatIf you have, then what was the reason?4. Do you know that it is illegal to kill Tigers? (Yes/No).In the same way, do you know that Fishing Cats areprotected by law?Yes/No5. Do you know that you can get arrested for killing FishingCats?Yes/No6.C)1.a.b.c.Have you ever seen or heard about tribal people killingFishing Cats in your area?HabitatDo you know where Fishing Cats live?HoglaBorojOther (specify)2. Do you know that they live in wetlands?Yes/No3. Was the expanse of wetlands more 20 years ago than it isnow?Yes/No4. Are wetlands shrinking according to you?Yes/No5. What do you think are the reasons behind degradation ofwetlands?D) Man-animal Conflict1. Have cats ever killed your poultry?Yes/No2.a.b.c.On an average how many of your animals are killed everymonth by Fishing Cat?01-5More than that3. Are the chickens kept in coops?Yes/No4. Have the coops/fence protecting your livestock ever beenbroken by Fishing Cat?Yes/No5. Do Fishing Cats eat fish from your pond?Yes/No6.How do you know that Fishing Cats have eaten the fish andnot any other animal like jungle Cat, Civet or Otter?7. Were you ever attacked by them when you saw them?Yes/NoE) Threat Mitigation1. Do you have any nature clubs or NGOs related to wildlifeconservation in your area?Yes/No2. Are you a part of such an organization?Yes/No3. If no, then would you like to be?Yes/No4. If we compensate for your livestock killing, would you stoppersecuting the fishing cats?Yes/No.Downloaded on 26 April 2012.Mukherjee, S., C.N. Ashalakshmi, C. Home & U.Ramakrishnan (2010b). A PCR-RFLP technique to identifyIndian felids and canids from scats. BioMed Central ResearchNotes 3: 159 (doi:10.1186/1756-0500-3-159).Mukherjee, N., S. Mondol, A. Andheria & U. Ramakrishnan(2007). Rapid multiplex PCR based species identificationof wild tigers using non-invasive samples. ConservationGenetics 8(6): 1465–1470.Nowell, K. & P. Jackson (eds.). (1996). Wild Cats, Status Surveyand Conservation Action Plan. IUCN, Gland Switzerland.382pp.Pocock, R.I. (1939). The fauna of British India, including Ceylonand Burma. Mammalia 1: Primates and Carnivora. (In part).2 nd edition. (Reprint edition, 1985 NewDelhi: Today andTomorrow’s Printers and Publishers,). Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.Prasad, S.N., T.V. Ramachandra, N. Ahalya, T. Sengupta,A. Alokumar, A.K. Tiwari, V.S. Vijayan & L. Vijayan(2002). Conservation of wetlands of India-a review. TropicalEcology 43: 173–186.Sunquist, M.E. & F.C. Sunquist (2002). Wild Cats of the World.University Chicago Press, Chicago, 452pp.Ravishankar, T., L. Gnanappazham, R. Ramasubramanian,D. Sridhar, M. Navamuniyammal & V. Selvam (2004).Atlas of Mangrove Wetlands of India, Part-2—AndhraPradesh. M.S. Swaminathan ResearchFoundation, Chennai, 136pp.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3355–33613361

JoTT No t e 4(14): 3362–3365First record of Okenia pellucida Burn,1967 (Mollusca: Nudibranchia) fromIndiaVishal Bhave 1 & Deepak Apte 21Scientist ‘B’, 2 Deputy Director (Conservation)Bombay Natural History Society, Hornbill House opp. Lion Gate,Shaheed Bhagat Singh Road, Mumbai 400 001, Maharashtra,IndiaEmail: 1 vishalbhave@gmail.com (corresponding author),2spiderconch@gmail.comopisthobranchs was carried out byApte (2009), Apte et al. (2010),Apte & Salahuddin (2011), Bhave& Apte (2010) and Ramakrishnaet al. (2010). The present paper deals with a recordof the goniodorid nudibranch Okenia pellucida Burn,1967. There are very few records of goniodoridsfrom India (Alder & Hancock 1864; Winckworth1946; Ramakrishna et al. 2010). Table 1 provides thechecklist of goniodorid species hereto recorded fromthe Indian coasts.India has a large and diverse coastal area in terms ofbiological as well as habitat diversity. India is bracingfor large coastal infrastructure development, whichwill impact intertidal biodiversity and the Maharashtracoast is not an exception. It is therefore essential todevelop baseline information on inter-tidal marinebiodiversity. As part of this effort, scientists are workingon various taxa, and opisthobranchs are one such groupunder study. They are beautifully colored with highlydiverse adaptations to compensate for the loss of shellduring the course of evolution. Opisthobranchs arepoorly studied from Indian coasts, and recent work onDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: N. YonowManuscript details:Ms # o2929Received 27 August 2011Final received 19 June 2012Finally accepted 10 October 2012Citation: Vishal Bhave & Deepak Apte (2012). First record of Okeniapellucida Burn, 1967 (Mollusca: Nudibranchia) from India. Journal ofThreatened Taxa 4(14): 3362–3365.Copyright: © Vishal Bhave & Deepak Apte 2012. Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this articlein any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution byproviding adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: The present study would not have been possiblewithout the constant support of Director and staff of the BNHS. We thankDr. Bill Rudman, Dr. Richard Willan and Dr. Terry Gosliner for their supportin the form of personal communications, discussions, species validation andalso for providing literature. Authors would also like to thanks Dr. DennisGordon (NIWA, New Zealand) for confirmation of the bryozoan Zoobotryonverticillatum from Ratnagiri. Mr. Vishwas Shinde and Rajendra Pawarprovided valuable field assistance in searching for cryptic opisthobranchsduring the survey. Lastly authors would like to thanks referees for theconstructive comments.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:14083759-A12C-45CC-A50F-A513EB94FACAOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADMaterials and MethodsDirect search method was used to find theopisthobranchs by turning over rocks and boulders in theintertidal region covering various microhabitats suchas rock pools and rocky areas. These specimens werecollected along with the host bryozoan (Zoobotryonverticillatum delle Chiaje, 1828) and kept live in aquariafor a week to study their behavior. Photographs, bothunderwater and in the laboratory, were captured usinga Canon G10 camera. The specimens were preserveddirectly in 95% ethyl alcohol and deposited in BNHS’sopisthobranch collection. The radula was extractedby dissolving the buccal mass in sodium hypochloriteand images were captured using a Leica MicrosystemMicroscope (Leica EZ 4D and Leica DM 750). Theseries of microscopic images captured at variousdepths of field were then combined using the opensource software package Combine ZP (http://www.hadleyweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/CZP/News.htm).DescriptionsOkenia pellucida Burn, 1967(Images 1 - On prey Zoobotryon verticillatum; 2 -Lateral side; 3 - Dorsal side; 4 - Whole radula, scalebar 200µm; 5 - Innermost radular teeth from new/oldrows 23 rd , scale bar 200µm; 6 - Egg case).Material: A single specimen was used for radulapreparation from each of the following collections:(a) Eight specimens collected from the rocky shorenear Lighthouse, Ratnagiri on 22.ii.2010 (CatalogId BNHS-Opistho-296 [voucher]) on Zoobotryonverticillatum; (b) Two specimens from Mirya,Ratnagiri 06.v.2011 (Catalog Id BNHS-Opistho-627[voucher]) on Zoobotryon verticillatum.3362Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3362–3365

Okenia pellucida from IndiaV. Bhave & D. Apte© Vishal Bhave © Vishal BhaveImage 2. Lateral sideImage 1. On prey Zoobotryon verticillatum© Vishal Bhave© Vishal BhaveImage 3. Dorsal sideImage 4. Whole radula (light microscope photograph)Size: 6–20 mmGeographic Distribution: Rudman (2004a) andGosliner (2004) in their reviews have provided thedistribution of this species. The species is known to bewidely distributed in New Zealand, Australia, Hawaii,Japan, Palmyra Atoll, Oceania, Malaysia and UnitedArab Emirates.Morphology (Images 1–3): The animal is somewhatelongated with a long tail which was observed to behelpful to cling onto the bryozoan host while feeding.There are 10–12 lateral papillae on each side of themantle and 5–6 papillae on the dorsal side of thenotum. The eight gills are large, bi-pinnate and forma thick rosette. The head can be distinguished easilyand the oral tentacles are triangular. The rhinophoresare long, approximate 2.5–3 mm, almost 1.5 times thelength of the head when alive. Two small papillaeTable 1. Goniodorid fauna recorded from IndiaSNo Name of the species Recorded by Locality1 Goniodoridella savignyi Pruvot-Fol, 1933 Ramakrishna et al. 2010 Andaman Island2 Goniodoris aspersa Alder & Hancock, 1864 Alder & Hancock 1864 Vishakhapattanam3 Goniodoris citrina Alder & Hancock, 1864 Alder & Hancock 1864 Vishakhapattanam4 Goniodoris modesta Alder & Hancock, 1864 Alder & Hancock 1864 Vishakhapattanam5 Goniodoris kolabana Winckworth, 1946 Winckworth 1946 Mumbai, MaharashtraJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3362–33653363

Okenia pellucida from IndiaV. Bhave & D. Apte© Vishal Bhave© Vishal BhaveImage 5. Lateral view of innermost radular teeth from rows23- light micrograph processed with Combine ZP Image 6. Egg case0.2mm© Vishal BhaveImage 7. Free swimming veligers (with eye spots andlarval shells)are present on the posterior side of each rhinophoreextending up to half its height. There are two papillaein front of each rhinophore.Color: The overall color of the mantle is creamywhite and randomly marked with brown wavy lines.The rhinophores are creamy white; a subapical band ofbrownish-orange is present on rhinophore and is 1/4 thof rhinophore height. In some specimens, the baseof the rhinophores shows an aggregation of brownwavy lines. Rhinophore tips are pale followed bypale brownish band which is one-fourth in size thanthat of the rhinophore. Gills are whitish and in somespecimens with brownish pigmentation at the base.Oral veil is triangular with oral tentacles short withrounded corners.Radular morphology (Images 4–5): The radularformula of an 18mm animal was 23x1.1.0.1.1. Thefirst lateral tooth is an elongated bicuspid bladeand inner margin of inner cusp is denticulate withapproximately 10–12 denticles. The size of teeth at itslongest edge is 89.37µm. Breadth at blade portion isaround 15.20µm.Egg case and Larvae (Images 6–7 ): The egg casesare randomly laid in the form of white tubular strings.These are loosely attached to the host bryozoans and3364Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3362–3365

Okenia pellucida from Indiathus can be easily detached. It is due to the networkstructure of the Zoobotryon verticillatum colony thatthe egg cases become entangled and protected. Eggsare large and can be seen by the naked eye in freshlylaid egg cases. The length of the string varies between16–20 mm and the width is around 1–1.5 mm (Image6).Free swimming larvae were observed in the eggcases collected from the field. However, these eggswere not freshly laid. The larvae were moving in theegg capsules. The larvae measured around 0.1mm indiameter, when these were free. Large eyespots andclear larval vail with cilia and transparent large shellwere easy to spot (Image 7).DiscussionThis is the first record of Okenia pellucida from theIndian subcontinental waters. This species is knownto be an oblicate associate of the fouling bryozoansZoobotryon verticillatum (Atkinson & Atkinson 2000;Rudman 2004a,b). During the present study, we alsoobserved O. pellucida associated with Zoobotryonverticillatum.There are a few records of Zoobotryonverticillatum along the coastal shores of India (Swami& Udhayakumar 2010; BioSearch 2011) confinedmostly to the east coast of India. This species wasrecorded from the Mumbai coast recently (Swami &Udhayakumar 2010) and it is the only known recordof it on the west coast of India. However, this speciesis possibly widespread along other parts of India, thusthe distribution of O. pellucida could be widespreadalong the coastline. More intensive surveys can throwlight on its distribution along the Indian coast.ReferencesAlder, J. & A. Hancock (1864). Notice on the collection ofNudibranchiate Mollusca made in India by Walter EliotEsq. with descriptions of several new genera and species.Transaction of Zoological Society of London 5: 117–147.Atkinson, D. & L. Atkinson (2000). Bryozoan food of Okeniapellucida. [message in] Sea Slug Forum. Australian Museum,V. Bhave & D. ApteSydney. Online version dated 29 February 2000.Apte, D. (2009). Opisthobranch fauna of Lakshadweep islands,India, with 52 new records to Lakshadweep and 40 newrecords to India: part 1. Journal of the Bombay NaturalHistory Society 106(2): 162–175.Apte, D., V. Bhave & D. Parasharya (2010). An annotatedand illustrated checklist of the opisthobranch fauna of Gulfof Kutch, Gujarat, India with 21 new records for Gujaratand 13 new records for India: part 1. Journal of the BombayNatural History Society 107(1): 14–23.Apte, D. & V.K. Salahuddin (2011). Record of Hexabranchussanguineus (Rüppell and Leuckart, 1828) from LakshadweepArchipelago, India. Journal of the Bombay Natural HistorySociety 107(3): 261–262.Bhave, V. & D. Apte (2010). ‘Opisthobranch fauna from westcoast of India, Abstracts World Congress of Malacology,Phuket’. Tropical Natural History, Supplement 3, p.54.Burn, R.F. (1967). Descriptions of two new species of Okenia(Nudibranchia, Doridacea) from south-eastern Australia.Proceedings of the Royal Zoological Society of New SouthWales, 1965/1966, pp.52–57.BioSearch (2011). Bioinformatics Centre, National Instituteof Oceanography, Goa, India On-line versiondated 12 May 2011Gosliner, T.M. (2004). Phylogenetic systematics of Okenia,Sakishimaia, Hopkinsiella and Hopkinsia (Nudibranchia:Goniodorididae) with descriptions of new species fromthe tropical Indo-Pacific. Proceedings of the CaliforniaAcademy of Sciences, 55, 125–161+29 figs.Ramakrishna, C.R. Sreeraj, C. Raghunathan, C.Sivaperuman, J.S.Y. Kumar, R. Raghuraman, T.Iammanuel & P.T. Rajan (2010). Guide to opisthobranchsof Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Zoological Survey ofIndia, Kolkata, 143pp.Rudman, W.B. (2004a). Further species of the opisthobranchgenus Okenia (Nudibranchia: Goniodorididae) from theIndo-West Pacific. Zootaxa 695: 1–70.Rudman, W.B. (2004b). Okenia pellucida Burn, 1967. [In] SeaSlug Forum. Australian Museum, Sydney. On-lineversion dated 12 December 2004.Swami, B.S. & M. Udhayakumar (2010). Seasonal influenceon settlement, distribution and diversity of foulingorganisms at Mumbai harbour. Indian Journal of MarineSciences 39(1): 57–67.Winckworth, H.C. (1946). A new Goniodoris from Bombay.Journal of Molluscan Studies 27(2): 59–61.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3362–33653365

JoTT No t e 4(14): 3366–3368The hitherto undescribed male ofOrthozona quadrilineata (Moore, 1882)(Lepidoptera: Erebidae)Peter Smetacek 1 & I.J. Kitching 21Butterfly Research Centre, Jones Estate, Bhimtal, Uttarakhand263136, India2Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum,Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, U.K.Email: 1 petersmetacek@rediffmail.com (corresponding author),2i.kitching@nhm.ac.uk>Madopa quadrilineata Moore, 1882 (Lepidoptera:Erebidae) was originally described from “Darjiling”(= Darjeeling, West Bengal, India) from an unstatednumber of specimens, which Moore (1882) statedwere both in his own collection and that of OttoStaudinger. Both sexes were apparently representedamong the syntypes, for Moore (1882) noted that themoth was “pale purplish-brownish-ochreous, brighterin female…”Hampson (1895) later erected the genus Orthozonawith M. quadrilineata as the only included species andthe type species by original designation. However, hedescribed only the female and diagnosed the genuson female characters: “Female: Palpi with the secondjoint porrect, of moderate length, and fringed with hairabove, the third upturned and naked; a short sharpfrontal tuft; antennae minutelyciliated; thorax and abdomensmoothly scaled, tibiae not hairy.Forewing with the apex nearlyrectangular; vein 3 [Cu1a] from before angle of cell.Hind wing with veins 4 [M3] and 5 [M2] from angle ofcell; 3 [Cu1a] from before angle of cell.”We found only a single female syntype in thecollection of the Natural History Museum, London(BMNH) (Images 1 & 2) thus it appears that Moorehad only this female in his personal collection, whichwas subsequently passed on to the BMNH in 1894.It may be that this is the sole specimen upon whichHampson based his diagnosis of the genus Orthozona.However, there may be male syntype(s) in Staudinger’scollection (and which may now be in the Museumfür Naturkunde, Leibnitz-Institut für Evolutions-undBiodiversitätsförschung an der Humboldt-UniversitätDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Image 1. Orthozona quadrilineata female syntype (BMNH).Editor: George MathewManuscript details:Ms # o2749Received 05 April 2011Final revised received 28 August 2012Finally accepted 13 October 2012Citation: Smetacek, P. & I.J. Kitching (2012). The hitherto undescribedmale of Orthozona quadrilineata (Moore, 1882) (Lepidoptera: Erebidae).Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3366–3368.Copyright: © Peter Smetacek & I.J. Kitching 2012. Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this articlein any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution byproviding adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: PS is indebted to the Rufford Small GrantFoundation, U.K., for financial support during the period when this workwas undertaken.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:FEE22F4B-2AC3-402E-BBE6-1DBF5BE5785EOPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADImage 2. Orthozona quadrilineata female syntype palpi(BMNH).3366Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3366–3368

Undescribed male Orthozona quadrilineatazu Berlin, Germany) but we have not yet been able toconfirm this. A label attached to the BMNH syntypestates, “Agrees exactly with type in coll. Stdgr. [inTams’ handwriting] W.H.T. Tams det. [printed]”. IfTams’ statement that the agreement is exact is correct,then it would appear that the “type” in coll. Staudingeris also a female. It may therefore be that Moore missexedone of the syntypes. However, there may also beother, male (and as yet unrecognized) syntypes in coll.Staudinger, or perhaps Tams did not notice differencesin palpus structure.In the present paper, we illustrate and describe morefully the male of Orthozona quadrilineata (Images 3& 4), add male characters to the generic diagnosisof Orthozona and extend the range of the genus andspecies northwest to Gagar (2400m) in Nainital Districtof the Kumaon Himalaya, Uttarakhand, India.Material examined23.vii.2007, 1 male, Gagar, Nainital District,Uttarakhand, India, 2400m, 29 0 24’47”N & 79 0 32’39”E,leg. & coll. P. Smetacek, Butterfly Research Centre,Jones Estate, Bhimtal, Uttarakhand, India; det. I.J.Kitching. Reference no.: PSTYPE 131; Forewinglength: 17mm.1 female (syntype): Darjeeling, 1864, Moore Coll,[18] 94–106 [BMNH accession number]. Forewinglength: 15.5mm.Male generic characters: Palpi recurved, thirdsegment half the length of the second, antennaeminutely ciliated; thorax and abdomen smoothlyscaled; tibiae not hairy; forewing apex as in the female,nearly square; vein Cu1a from before angle of cell;hindwing M2 and M3 from angle of cell, vein Cu1afrom before the angle.Description of male: Head, thorax and abdomenfuscous brown. Forewing upperside pale reddish greybrown,with a rufous speck in the discal cell; a welldefinedreniform stigma present, outlined in rufous;prominent oblique medial and submarginal rufouslines. Hindwing upperside pale fuscous, with anindistinct antemedial line and prominent submarginalrufous line from below costa to near anal angle.Forewing underside uniform grey with the costal areaabove cell pale cream. Hindwing underside grey, withdark antemedial and medial lines and crenulated palepostmedial band edged with fuscous.P. Smetacek & I.J. KitchingImage 3. Orthozona quadrilineata male (coll. P. Smetacek)Image 4. Orthozona quadrilineata male palpi (coll. P.Smetacek).DiscussionCurrently, five species are recognized in Orthozona:O. quadrilineata, O. bilineata Wileman, 1915, O.curvilineata Wileman, 1915, O. karapina Strand,1920 and O. rufilineata (Hampson, 1895) (Beccaloniet al. 2003). In the original description of Orthozonacurvilineata from Taiwan, Wileman (1915) statedthat “The palpi of the sexes differ in structure, but asregards this character the female agrees exactly withfemale O. quadrilineata, Moore, upon which thegenus Orthozona, Hampson, was founded.” A malesyntype of O. curvilineata Wileman and its palpi areshown in Image 5 and a female in Image 6, where thesexually dimorphic nature of these structures is clearlyvisible. A further male and the female syntype in theBMNH show the same dimorphism. However, as O.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3366–33683367

Undescribed male Orthozona quadrilineataP. Smetacek & I.J. KitchingImage 6. Orthozona curvilineata female syntype showingpalpi (BMNH).Image 5. Orthozona curvilineata male syntype showingpalpi (BMNH).quadrilineata is the type species and the condition ofthe palpi in the male was undescribed, there was anelement of uncertainty whether sexual dimorphism inthe structure of palpi was indeed a generic feature, ratherthan just a species-specific feature of O. curvilineata.After examining the present male specimen of O.quadrilineata, it appears more likely that sexualdimorphism in palpus structure is indeed a genericfeature of Orthozona. Certainly, the male holotypeof O. bilineata is consistent in having upturned palpi,but no female of this species is known. There areno specimens of O. karapina or O. rufilineata in theBMNH, but a painting of the type of the latter appearsto show a female (the abdomen is rather plump andhas is rounded posteriorly) with porrect palpi, so thisspecimen is also consistent although examination ofthe specimen itself is required for confirmation.Orthozona quadrilineata seems to be restricted tothe higher parts of the subtropical evergreen forests ofthe Himalaya between Kumaon and Darjeeling. In thewestern Himalaya, this forest type consists mainly ofQuercus leucotrichophora A Camus and Q. floribundaLindley ex A. Camus (Fagaceae). The moth’s rangeprobably extends further east, through Bhutan andinto Arunachal Pradesh, and possibly even further.However, it seems to be a rare species; in additionto the few (maybe only two) syntypes, only a singlefurther specimen was captured at the mercury vapourlamp run at Gagar throughout 2007 and part of 2008.REFERENCESBeccaloni, G.W., M.J. Scoble, G.S. Robinson & B. Pitkin(Editors) (2003). The Global Lepidoptera Names Index(LepIndex). World Wide Web electronic publication. http://www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/lepindex [accessed 31 March2011]Hampson, G.F. (1895). The Fauna of British India includingCeylon and Burma—Moths Vol. 3. Taylor & Francis,London, 28+546pp.Moore, F. (1882). Descriptions of Indian Lepidoptera Heterocerafrom the collection of the late Mr. W.S. Atkinson [Part 2].pp. 89–198, in: Hewitson, W.C. & F. Moore (1879–1888).Descriptions of New Indian Lepidopterous Insects from theCollection of the Late Mr. W.S. Atkinson. M.A., F.L.S., &c.Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, 299pp+8pls.Wileman, A.E. (1915). New species of Heterocera fromTaiwan. The Entomologist 48: 39.3368Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3366–3368

JoTT No t e 4(14): 3369–3372First record of two tubuliferan and fourterebrantian species of Thysanoptera(Insecta) from northeastern IndiaKh. Bala 1 , O. Tarunkumar Singh 2 , H. Taptamani3& R. Varatharajan 41,2,3,4Centre of Advanced Study in Life SciencesManipur University, Imphal, Manipur 795003, IndiaEmail: 1 balakhkm@gmail.com, 2 otsingh2010@gmail.com,3tapta18jan@gmail.com, 4 rvrajanramya@rediffmail.com(corresponding author)The order Thysanoptera popularly known as thripsor fringe wings are known to be of considerablesignificance as they feed on food and horticulturalplants and also due to their ability to act as vectorsof some bacterial, fungal and viral diseases of plants(David & Ananthakrishnan 2004). In spite of extensivetaxonomic contributions mainly by Ananthakrishnan& Sen (1980) and Bhatti (1994), there is a paucityof information on thrips of northeastern India. Allspecimens were collected during the present studyfrom Manipur and Nagaland. Prior to this, theiroccurrences were known only from a few SoutheastAsian countries. Specimens collected in the presentstudy are deposited in the insect museum of theDepartment of Life Sciences, Manipur University.Date of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: K.G. SivaramakrishnanManuscript details:Ms # o3052Received 03 January 2012Final received 12 May 2012Finally accepted 02 September 2012Citation: Bala, K., O.T. Singh, H. Taptamani & R. Varatharajan (2012). Firstrecord of two tubuliferan and four terebrantian species of Thysanoptera(Insecta) from northeastern India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14):3369–3372.Copyright: © Kh. Bala, O. Tarunkumar Singh, H. Taptamani & R.Varatharajan 2012. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in any medium for non-profitpurposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to theauthors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: The authors thank the Ministry of Environment andForest, New Delhi for the financial support and to the Head, Department ofLife Sciences, Manipur University for the laboratory facilities.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B8555A58-0C76-46F0-9EA2-D7906177E907OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADThe present new records willhopefully motivate future workersto engage in indepth survey andtaxonomic explorations of thripsin the north-east, a biodiversity hotspot.Suborder: TubuliferaFamily: Phlaeothripidae1. Baenothrips asper (Bournier, 1963)Transithrips asper Bournier, 1963, Publ. Cult. Co.Diam. Angola, 63: 81.Transithrips asper Bournier-Ananthakrishnan, 1966,Bull.Ent., 7: 11.Baenothrips asper (Bournier) - Mound, 1972. Aust. J.Zool., 20: 92.Baenothrips asper (Bournier) - Ananthakrishnan &Sen, 1980, Zool. Surv. India, Handbk. Ser., 1: 82 &145.Baenothrips asper (Bournier) - Bhatti, 2002, OrientalInsects, 36: 1–28.Specimen studied: 12 females, 25.ii.2002, 1400m,ex. mixed leaf litter, Khuzama (Nagaland), (MU/LSDNo. B/Myco/17) (Table 1 and Image 1).Distribution: India [Eastern Ghat (apterous form),Nagaland (macropterous form - new record)], Angola,Luanda, Taiwan.Comments: As early as 1963, Bournierdescribed the macropterous form of Baenothripsasper (= Transithrips asper) from Angola, Africa.Subsequently, occurrence of B. asper was reportedfrom India (Ananthakrishnan 1966) and Taiwan(Kudo 1978) based on the apterous individuals.However, Bhatti (2002) on examining the Indianmaterials felt that there could be two different speciesof Baenothrips including that of apterous B. asper, butthe identity of the latter did not match with the wingedform of Angolan species. Recently, during the surveyin Nagaland, a dozen individuals of the macropterousform of B. asper were collected from mixed leaflitter. The characters of these specimens were foundidentical with that of Angolan materials of B. asper,that being recharacterized by Bhatti (2002) based on itsparatypes. Further, a comparative account of certainmorphometric data (Table 1) of the materials collectedduring the present study also showed similarity withthat of Angolan specimens as provided by Bhatti (2002).Such comparisons on morphometric measurementsJournal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3369–3372 3369

Thysanoptera new records1K. Bala et al.11© Entomology Division (MULSD)© Entomology Division (MULSD)© Entomology Division (MULSD)Image 1. Baenothrips asper Image 2. Dyothrips pallescens Image 3. Dendrothrips schimaeand features of the winged form have clearly indicatedthat the specimens collected from Nagaland are B.asper. Thus, it becomes evident that the macropterousform of B. asper occurs in India besides the Africancontinent and the present observation is the first ofits kind to report its occurrence in the Indo-MyanmarBiodiversity Hotspot region of northeastern India.2. Dyothrips pallescens (Hood, 1919)Zygothrips pallescens Hood, 1919: Proc. Biol. Soc.Washington. 32: 75–92.Dyothrips pallescens (Hood, 1919): Mound & Minaei,(2007). J. Nat. Hist., 41: 2919–78.Morphological features: Antennae 8 segmented;III with one sense cone; IV with 4 sense cones; Headlonger than wide; body bicolourous; metathorax andabdominal segment I- yellow; rest brown. Prothoracicnotopleural sutures incomplete. Fore wings withoutdouble fringes; all tarsi yellow, fore tarsi tooth absent.Post ocular and pronotal setae, and tergite IX setae S1& S2 expanded (Image 2).Specimen studied: 1 male and 5 females,18.vii.2010, Kangla (Manipur - new record); 750m,ex. Grass (Dichanthium annulatum (Forssk.) Stapf.(MU/LSD No. G T: 25).Distribution: Australia, Bangladesh, China, Fiji,India (this report), Japan, Pakistan, Thailand, Taiwan.Suborder: TerebrantiaFour species of terebrantians, viz., Dendrothripsschimae Kudo (1989), Mycterothrips consociatus(Targioni-Tozzetti, 1887), Panchaetothrips stepheniReyes (1994), and Parabaliothrips coluckus (Kudo,1977) (Thripidae) are collected in the present study.1. Dendrothrips schimae Kudo, 1989Dendrothrips schimae Kudo, 1989, Japanese Journalof Entomology 57(1): 42-45.Dendrothrips schimae Kudo-Bhatti, 1990, ZoologyTable 1. Comparative morphometric data pertaining toBaenothrips asperParametersNagalandspecimenAngolanspecimen**Head- length/width 144-160/152-160 125-134/147-154Cephalic setae length-Median/LateralAntennal segment- length/widthIIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIII64-72/48-56 62-70/56-6320-24/22-2432-40/28-3236-40/2236-40/2432/20-2328-32/16-2024-32/12-1420-24/8Pronotum- length 88-120 92-94Epimeral setae-length 24-32 2720-21/27-2836/30-3241-42/2237-38/2532-33/2330-32/20-2127-28/13-1423/8-9Tube-length 300-336 278-318(All measurements are in μ, ** Bhatti 2002)3370Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3369–3372

Thysanoptera new records2(4): 225.Morphological features: Head irregularlyreticulated between eyes, ocellar crescent red, cheekswith one moderately developed setae just on the lateralsides below eye. Antenna eight segmented. Forewingsuniformly covered with microtrichia and banded.Pronotum transversely to slightly anastomosingstriations. Abdominal segments II-VIII with twomedian setae, posterior marginal setae on IX stronglydeveloped (Image 3).Macropterous (female): Body dark brown withred pigments; abdominal segments pale at middle,legs brown except tarsi. Forewings brown with anincompletely formed light cross band, sub apex pale.Antennal segments 1, 2, 6–8 brown, 3–5 yellow.Macropterous (male): Head ,thorax and abdominalsegments V-VII brown, II-IV and VIII-X pale yellow.Forewing with a complete band with paler sub apex.All femora and tibiae brown, tarsi yellow.Specimen studied: 5 females, 3 males, 5.ii.2001,Impur (Nagaland); 1350m, ex. Polygonatummultiflorum Allioni (Liliaceae) (MU/LSD No. B/Weed/30).Distribution: India (Nagaland-new record); earlierknown only from Nepal.2. Mycterothrips consociatus (Targioni-Tozzetti,1887)Thrips (Euthrips) consociatus Targioni-Tozzetti, 1887:Entomologica italiana 18(4): 419–431.Mycterothrips consociatus (Targioni-Tozzetti, 1887):Masumoto & Okajima (2006): Zootaxa 1261: 1–90.Morphological features: Body pale; antennae I-pale, II-VIII uniformly brown (this character is uniquefor the present specimen); Antennae ratio: VI/(I-V)=1.2-1.45; Microtrichia absent on antennae VI; CPSabsent on Mesonotum; Costal setae- 24–26; Uppervein- (6–7) +2; Lower vein setae- (9–10); Medianpair of setae on mesonotum near posterior margin;Metascutum irregularly reticulate medially; medianpair of setae near anterior margin; Sense cone on III& IV not reaching the middle of its upper segment(Image 4).Specimen studied: 8 males, 10.iv.2011, Moreh(Manipur - new record), 204m, ex. Bamboo foliage(small variety) (Poaceae) (MU/LSD No. M-T: 62).Distribution: Austria, Czechoslovakia, Germany,Italy.K. Bala et al.3. Panchaetothrips stepheni Reyes, 1994Panchaetothrips stepheni Reyes, C.P. 1994. TheRaffles Bulletin of Zoology 42: 107–507.Panchaetothrips stepheni Kudo, I. 1995. InsectaMatsumurana, New Series 52: 81–103.Morphological features: Body brown; Head entirelyreticulate except on occipital collar; small setae presentmidway between the eye and hind ocellus. Reticleson the head posterior to the ocelli with wrinkles ormarkings; Sense cones on antennal segment IV forkedwhile on III both simple and forked. Strong, stoutlong setae present on the wings. Antecostal lines ontergite III-VIII with weak posteriorly directed notches.Metanotum with an inverted triangle (Image 5).Specimen studied: 1 female, 5.iv.2008, Moreh(Manipur - new record); 204m, ex. unidentified weedfoliage (MU/LSD No. Weed/M-T: 67).Distribution: Luzon, Philippine Islands.4. Parabaliothrips coluckus (Kudo, 1977)Krasibothrips coluckus Kudo, 1977, Kontyu, 45(1):4–8. (Japan).Krasibothrips coluckus Kudo: Ananthakrishnan andSen, 1980, Zool. Surv. India. Handbk. Ser., 1: 69 &138.Parabaliothrips coluckus (Kudo): Bhatti, 1990,Zoology 2(4): 244.Morphological features: Body dark brown. Headlittle longer than wide, cheeks weakly serrated with2–3 setae, vertex with two pairs of anteocellar setae,interocellar setae placed just behind ocellar trianglein line with posterior margin of hind ocelli. Antennalsegments 3–4 with forked sense cones, 1, 2 brown,3–5 yellow, 6 yellow at base, rest brown. Pronotumshorter than head, nearly rounded with exceptionallydeveloped postangular setae, anteromarginal longerthan anteroangular. Forewing brown with stronglydeveloped setae, subbasal pale. All femora, mid andhind tibiae brown, all tarsi yellow. Comb on abdominaltergite VIII minute but complete; segments III-VII ofmales with transverse glandular areas, setae on IXexceptionally strong (Image 6).Specimen studied: 5 females, 2 males, 31.ix.2000,Kohima (Nagaland), 1400m, ex. Quercus serrata(Thunb.) (Fagaceae); 8 females, 2 males, 24.viii.2001,Tengnoupal (Manipur), 1300m, ex. Q. serrata (Thunb.)(Fagaceae) (MU/LSD No. M-T: 68).Distribution: Nepal, Taiwan, (India: Manipur &Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3369–33723371

Thysanoptera new recordsK. Bala et al.© Entomology Division (MULSD)Image 4. Mycterothrips consociatus1© Entomology Division (MULSD)1Image 5. Panchaetothrips stepheniImage 6. Parabaliothrips coluckus© Entomology Division (MULSD)Nagaland - new record).REFERENCESAnanthakrishnan, T.N. (1966). Thysanopterologica indica -IV. Bulletin of Entomology 7: 1-12.Ananthakrishnan, T.N. & S. Sen (1980). Taxonomy of IndianThysanoptera. Handbook Series No.1. Zoological survey ofIndia, 234ppBhatti, J.S. (1990). Catalogue of insects of the Order Terebrantiafrom Indian subregion. Zoology 2(4): 205–352.Bhatti, J.S. (1994). Phylogenetic relationships amongThysanoptera (Insecta) with particular reference to thefamilies of the Order Tubulifera. Zoology (Journal of Pureand Applied Zoology) 4(1993): 93–130.Bhatti, J.S. (2002). Identification of the Urothripid Baenothripsasper (Bournier, 1963) (Tubulifera: Urothripidae). OrientalInsects 36: 1–28.Bournier, A. (1963). Thysanopteres de l’ Angola, II. Publ. Cult.Comp. Diam. Angola 63: 75-86. (source: Bhatti, 2002).David, B.V. & T.N. Ananthakrishnan (2004). General andApplied Entomology (Second Edition). Tata McGraw-HillPublishing Company Limited, New Delhi, 1184pp.Hood, J.D. (1919). Two new genera and thirteen new speciesof Australian Thysanoptera. Proceedings of the BiologicalSociety of Washington 32: 75–92. (source: Check list onWorld Thysanoptera) Kudo, I. (1977). A new genus and two new species of Thripidae(Thysanoptera) from Nepal. Kontyu 45(1): 1–8.Kudo, I. (1978). Some Urothripine Thysanoptera from easternAsia. Kontyu 46(2): 169–175.Kudo, I. (1989). Three species of Dendrothrips (Thysanoptera,Thripidae) from Nepal, with description of a new species.Japanese Journal of Entomology 57: 37–45Kudo, I. (1995). Some Panchaetothrips from Nepal, Malaysiaand the Philippines (Thysanoptera: Terebrantia: Thripidae).Insecta Matsumurana (New Series) 52: 81–103.Masumoto, M. & S. Okajima (2006). A revision of and key tothe world species of Mycterothrips Trybom (Thysanoptera,Thripidae). Zootaxa 1261: 1–90.Mound, L.A. & K. Minaei (2007). Australian thrips of theHaplothrips lineage (Insecta: Thysanoptera). Journal ofNatural History 41: 2919–2978.Reyes, C.P. (1994). Thysanoptera (Hexapoda) of the PhilippineIsland. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 42: 107–507.Targioni-Tozzetti, A. (1887). Notizie sommarie di due speciedi Cecidomidei, una consocociata ad un Phytoptus, ad altriacari e ad una Thrips in alcune galle del Nocciola (Corylusavellana L.), una gregaria sotto la scorza dei rami di Olivi,nello stato larvale. Bollettino della Societa` Entomologicaitaliana 18(4): 419–431. (source: world check list on thrips:http://anic.ento.csiro.au/worldthrips/taxon_search.asp).3372Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3369–3372

JoTT No t e 4(14): 3373–3374A note on the migration of DarkCerulean Jamides bochus (Stoll)(Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) inEravikulam National Park,Idukki District, Kerala, IndiaMuhamed Jafer PalotWestern Ghat Regional Centre, Zoological Survey of India,Kozhikode, Kerala 673006, IndiaEmail: palot.zsi@gmail.comDuring a recent faunal survey from 7–13 April2012 at the Eravikulam National Park, Idukki District,Kerala, the migratory movement of Dark CeruleanJamides bochus (Stoll), was observed near Bhimanada(10.18554N & 77.09081E; 2085m) on 12 April 2012.They were flying from the high ranges to lowerelevations in a north-east to south-west direction. Theswarm was noticed at around 11:00hr flying throughthe trek path along the edges of a shola patch. Initiallythe count was about 36 in 5 minutes from 11:00 to 11:05hr which increased to 65 from 11:15 to 11:20 hr. Thewind direction was supportive for the migration. Allwere flying at a height of 2–3 m from the ground. Attimes, the butterflies were found resting on the flowersof Crofton Weed Ageratina adenophora for nectar(Image 1). The unmistakableglistening blue on the forewingindicated that the majority of themwere male, and the swarm lookedlike a series of glistening blue flashes during the flight.The weather was sunny, and the wind was from east towest. However, it had been rainy and cloudy duringthe previous few days in and around Eravikulam. Thesummer rains on the hills probably triggered the massmovement of the butterflies.The other butterflies observed along with themigration of Dark Ceruleans were the Common BlueBottle Graphium sarpedon, Common Crow Euploeacore, Indian Cabbage White Pieris canidia and theWhite-Disc Hedge Blue Celatoxia albidisca. As manyas six Common Blue Bottles, five Common Crows,five Indian Cabbage Whites and four White DiscHedge Blues were observed during the count, flyingalong with the swarms of Dark Cerulean. The otherbutterfly species flew along with the migration for ashort while and returning.While climbing from the foothills of Vaguvarai inthe morning, an unusually large assemblage of DarkCerulean butterflies flying around the bushes and teaplantations was noticed. But the species was totallyabsent beyond Bhimanada. On our return trip on 13April 2012, again the migration of these butterfliesflying in same direction, but in smaller numbers, wasDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)© Md. Jafer PalotEditor: George MathewManuscript details:Ms # o3244Received 30 June 2012Finally accepted 28 September 2012Citation: Palot, M.J. (2012). A note on the migration of Dark CeruleanJamides bochus (Stoll) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Eravikulam NationalPark, Idukki District, Kerala, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14):3373–3374.Copyright: © Muhamed Jafer Palot 2012. Creative Commons Attribution3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in anymedium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by providingadequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.Acknowledgements: The author is grateful Dr. K. Venkatraman, Director,Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Kolkata and to Shri. C. Radhakrishnan,Additional Director, ZSI, Kozhikode for facilities and encouragement.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:04766E59-ADD2-4FBC-9553-02F90560D6D0OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADImage 1. The Dark Cerulean Jamides bochus nectarfeeding from the flowers of Ageratina adenophora inEravikulam National Park.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3373–3374 3373

Migration of Dark Ceruleanobserved. About eight butterflies could be counted ataround 12:45 to 12:50 hr at the same spot.Dark Cerulean is a widespread species known tooccur in India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh(Kehimkar 2008). This beautiful little butterfly is foundalmost all over India, on the plains and in the hills,except in the arid northwest. Even though the species iscommon and frequently reported from other protectedareas of Kerala, it has not previously been reported atthe Eravikulam NP (Radhakrishnan & Sharma 2002).It is a known migrant species in the Nilgiris; Larsen(1987) reported migration of this species in the late1950s towards the east at Kotagiri. Williams (1938)on his report on ‘Migration of Butterflies in India’ didnot mention the migration of Dark Cerulean in India orelsewhere. A study on the migratory butterflies of theWestern Ghats of Kerala by Palot (2010) also did notlist this species from the region.Except for the Crotalaria spp., none of thelarval food plants known for the species—Buteamonosperma, Crotalaria spp., Millettia peguensis,Tephrosia candida, Vigna cylindrica, Pongamiapinnata, Xylia xylocarpa (Kunte 2000)—are reportedfrom the Eravikulam NP (Unniyal et al. 1998). A smallportion on the eastern periphery of the Park lying closeto Talliar Estate has deciduous forests with trees likeDalbergia latifolia, Pterocarpus marsupium, Xyliaxylocarpa and Pongamia pinnata including manylarval food plants of the Dark Cerulean. This forestpatch in the eastern side of the Park may be the stagingpoint for the large scale migration of Dark Cerulean inthe region.The other butterfly species observed during the trekfrom Vaguvarai to Hut on 12 April 2012 were the PalniM.J. PalotFourring Ypthima ypthimoides (100+), Indian CabbageWhite Pieris canidia (10), Small Orange Tip Colotisestrida (30), Red-disc Bushbrown Mycalesis oculus(25), Common Blue Bottle Graphium sarpedon (5),Indian Fritillary Argynnis hyperbius (5), Indian RedAdmiral Vanessa indica (6), Red Helen Papilio helenus(2), White-Disc Hedge Blue Celatoxia albidisca (4),and Tamil Grass Dart Taractrocera ceramas (6).ReferencesKehimkar, I. (2008). The Book of Indian Butterflies. BombayNatural History Society, Oxford University Press, Mumbai,i-xvi+497pp.Kunte, K. (2000). Butterflies of Peninsular India. UniversityPress (India) Limited, Hyderabad, i-xviii+254+31plates.Larsen, T.B. (1978). Butterfly migrations in the Nilgiri Hills ofsouth India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society74: 546–549.Palot, M.J. (2010). Butterfly migration studies in Kerala part ofWestern Ghats - an overview. In: First Indian BiodiversityCongress 2010: Book of Abstracts. No. 01.29 page: 38.ThiruvananthapuramUnniyal, V.K., G.S. Rawat & P.V. Karunakaran (1998).Ecology and Conservation of the Grasslands of EravikulamNational Park, Western Ghats. Wildlife Institute of India,Dehradun, 141pp.Williams, C.B. (1938). The migration of butterflies in India.Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 40: 439–457.Wynter-Blyth, M.A. (1957). Butterflies of the Indian Region.Bombay Natural History Society, Mumbai, 523pp.Radhakrishnan, C. & R.M. Sharma (2002). Insecta:Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera. In: Fauna of EravikulamNational Park, Conservation Area Series No. 13: 1–97.Published by the Director, Zoological Survey of India,Kolkata.3374Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3373–3374

JoTT No t e 4(14): 3375–3376Sighting record of Bengal FloricanHoubaropsis bengalensis (Gmelin,1789) (Aves: Gruiformes: Otididae) inLower Dibang Valley District, ArunachalPradesh, IndiaAlolika Sinha 1 , Jillol Hoque 2 , Tilak Pradhan 3 ,Manish Kumar Bakshi 4 , Jibi Pulu 5 , Alok KumarSingh 6 & M. Firoz Ahmed 71,2,3,4,7Aaranyak, 50 Evergreen, Samanway Path, Beltola Survey,Guwahati, Assam 781028, India5Mishmi Hill Camp, Ezengo, Roing, Lower Dibang ValleyDistrict, Arunachal Pradesh 792110, India6Ranger, Dibang Forest Division, Arunachal Forest DepartmentLower Dibnag Valley District, Arunachal Pradesh, IndiaEmail: 1 alolika@aaranyak.org (corresponding author),4manishkoolbakshi@gmail.com, 5 mishmihillcamp@gmail.com,7firoz@aaranyak.orgThe Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis(Gmelin, 1789) is a Critically Endangered speciesinhabiting the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia(BirdLife International 2012). It is a ground nestinggrassland bird (Poudyal et al. 2008), which was oncecommon in northern India, Nepal and the BrahmaputraValley of Assam (Rahmani 2001) in northeasternDate of publication (online): 26 November 2012Date of publication (print): 26 November 2012ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)Editor: Rajiv S. KalsiManuscript details:Ms # o2831Received 10 June 2011Final received 03 October 2012Finally accepted 15 October 2012Citation: Sinha, A., J. Hoque, T. Pradhan, M.K. Bakshi, J. Pulu, A.K. Singh& M.F. Ahmed (2012). Sighting record of Bengal Florican Houbaropsisbengalensis (Gmelin, 1789) (Aves: Gruiformes: Otididae) in Lower DibangValley District, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa4(14): 3375–3376.India. Bengal Florican is a habitatspecialist and prefers alluvialgrasslands dominated by Imperatacylindrica, Saccharum munja andDesmostachya bipinnata. Bengal Florican is a specieswith a narrow ecological niche, with a very small andrapidly declining population, largely as a result of thewidespread loss of its habitat. (BirdLife International2001; Rahmani 2001).On 05 March 2011, during a field visit to NizamGhat area near Roing in Lower Dibang Valley District,Arunachal Pradesh at 14:25hr (Image 1), we sighteda male Bengal Florican at New Elopa locality (28 0 12’57.2”N & 95 0 44’34.9”E) (Image 2). When firstsighted, the bird was in flight. Later it settled on theground, took refuge in the grassland and was out ofsight. It was identified with the presence of entirelywhite wings except for black tips in flight and also withits call (Grimmett et al. 1999). We were able to take aphotograph of the bird while in flight which helped usin identifying the bird as male. However, we could notassign the maturity of the individual (adult/subadult)due to inadequate clarity of the image and our limitedknowledge on the species.The breeding season of the species starts fromFebruary to July (Ali & Ripley 1987; Narayan 1992).The mature males establish individual territories inrelatively open and short grasslands. Subadult malesdo not usually establish breeding territories and areseen flying around the breeding sites. However, wecannot conclude anything for the observed behaviorfrom the single sighting.© M. Firoz AhmedCopyright: © Alolika Sinha, Jillol Hoque, Tilak Pradhan, Manish KumarBakshi, Jibi Pulu, Alok Kumar Singh & M. Firoz Ahmed 2012. CreativeCommons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted useof this article in any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction anddistribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and the source ofpublication.Acknowledgements: The authors are thankful to all the volunteers fromthe local community, without their help and cooperation the field work wouldnot have been possible. We acknowledge the constant support from theArunachal Forest Department.urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1AA009A7-E5D7-42AA-96CE-725761AED769OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOADImage 1. Bengal Florican in flight.Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3375–3376 3375

Bengal Florican in ArunachalA. Sinha et al.Image 2. Map showing sighting location (solid star) of Bengal Florican in the grassland beside the channels of DibangRiver and Nizamghat, Lower Dibang Valley District, Arunachal Pradesh.We later assessed the habitat that was dominated bythe Imperata cylindrica along with other short grasses.The local people also reported sighting of the bird inthe area.Bengal Florican is known to occur in D’EringWildlife Sanctuary (27 0 51’–28 0 5’N & 95 0 22–95 0 29’E)in Arunachal Pradesh (Narayan 1992; BirdlifeInternational 2001). In India population decline due tohabitat loss and hunting have restricted the distributionof the species within protected areas only (BirdLifeInternational 2001). However, the species also occursin some unprotected river islands in eastern India (M.Firoz Ahmed pers. obs. 2003). The significance of thissighting record was that it was outside the protectedarea in Lower Dibang Valley District in ArunachalPradesh, which in turn signifies the importance of nonprotected grasslands in this region.ReferencesAli, S. & S.D. Ripley (1987). Compact Handbook of the Birdsof India and Pakistan. Oxford University Press, New Delhi,xlii+737pp+104 colour plates.BirdLife International (2001). Threatened Birds of Asia - PartA. BirdLife International, Cambridge, xxx+1516pp.BirdLife International (2012). Houbaropsis bengalensis.In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.Version 2012.1. . Downloaded on16 October 2012.Grimmett, R., C. Inskipp & T. Inskipp (1999). Pocket guideto the birds of the Indian subcontinent. Oxford UniversityPress, New Delhi, 384pp.Poudyal, L.P., P.B. Singh & S. Maharjan (2008). The declineof Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis in Nepal.Danphe 17(1): 4–6.Narayan, G. (1992). Ecology, distribution and conservation ofthe Bengal Florican Houbaropsis begalensis (Gmelin) inIndia. PhD Thesis. University of Bombay, IV+301pp.Rahmani, A.R. (2001). Status of the Bengal FloricanHoubaropsis bengalensis in Uttar Pradesh, India. Bombay:Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay.3376Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | November 2012 | 4(14): 3375–3376

Dr. Ullasa Kodandaramaiah, Cambridge, UKDr. Pankaj Kumar, Tai Po, Hong KongDr. Krushnamegh Kunte, Cambridge, USAProf. Dr. Adriano Brilhante Kury, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilDr. P. Lakshminarasimhan, Howrah, IndiaDr. Carlos Alberto S de Lucena, Porto Alegre, BrazilDr. Glauco Machado, São Paulo, BrazilDr. Volker Mahnert, Douvaine, FranceDr. Gowri Mallapur, Mamallapuram, IndiaDr. George Mathew, Peechi, IndiaDr. Rudi Mattoni, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaProf. Richard Kiprono Mibey, Eldoret, KenyaDr. Lionel Monod, Genève, SwitzerlandDr. Shomen Mukherjee, Jamshedpur, IndiaDr. Shomita Mukherjee, Coimbatore, IndiaDr. Fred Naggs, London, UKDr. P.O. Nameer, Thrissur, IndiaDr. D. Narasimhan, Chennai, IndiaDr. T.C. Narendran, Kozhikode, IndiaMr. Stephen D. Nash, Stony Brook, USADr. K.S. Negi, Nainital, IndiaDr. K.A.I. Nekaris, Oxford, UKDr. Tim New, Melbourne, AustraliaDr. Heok Hee Ng, SingaporeDr. Boris P. Nikolov, Sofia, BulgariaProf. Annemarie Ohler, Paris, FranceDr. Shinsuki Okawara, Kanazawa, JapanDr. Albert Orr, Nathan, AustraliaDr. Geeta S. Padate, Vadodara, IndiaDr. Larry M. Page, Gainesville, USADr. Arun K. Pandey, Delhi, IndiaDr. Prakash Chand Pathania, Ludhiana, IndiaDr. Malcolm Pearch, Kent, UKDr. Richard S. Peigler, San Antonio, USADr. Rohan Pethiyagoda, Sydney, AustraliaMr. J. Praveen, Bengaluru, IndiaDr. Mark R Stanley Price, Tubney, UKDr. Robert Michael Pyle, Washington, USADr. Muhammad Ather Rafi, Islamabad, PakistanDr. H. Raghuram, Bengaluru, IndiaDr. Dwi Listyo Rahayu, Pemenang, IndonesiaDr. Sekar Raju, Suzhou, ChinaDr. Vatsavaya S. Raju, Warangal, IndiaDr. V.V. Ramamurthy, New Delhi, IndiaDr (Mrs). R. Ramanibai, Chennai, IndiaProf. S.N. Ramanujam, Shillong, IndiaDr. Alex Ramsay, LS2 7YU, UKDr. M.K. Vasudeva Rao, Pune, IndiaDr. Robert Raven, Queensland, AustraliaDr. K. Ravikumar, Bengaluru, IndiaDr. Luke Rendell, St. Andrews, UKDr. Heidi Riddle, Greenbrier, USADr. Anjum N. Rizvi, Dehra Dun, IndiaDr. Leif Ryvarden, Oslo, NorwayProf. Michael Samways, Matieland, South AfricaDr. Yves Samyn, Brussels, BelgiumDr. V. Shantharam, Chittor, IndiaProf. S.C. Santra, Kalyani, IndiaDr. Asok K. Sanyal, Kolkata, IndiaDr. K.R. Sasidharan, Coimbatore, IndiaMr. Kumaran Sathasivam, Madurai, IndiaDr. S. Sathyakumar, Dehradun, IndiaDr. M.M. Saxena, Bikaner, IndiaDr. Hendrik Segers, Vautierstraat, BelgiumDr. R. Siddappa Setty, Bengaluru, IndiaDr. Subodh Sharma, Towson, USAProf. B.K. Sharma, Shillong, IndiaProf. K.K. Sharma, Jammu, IndiaDr. R.M. Sharma, Jabalpur, IndiaDr. Tan Koh Siang, Kent Ridge Road, SingaporeDr. Arun P. Singh, Jorhat, IndiaDr. Lala A.K. Singh, Bhubaneswar, IndiaDr. K.G. Sivaramakrishnan, Chennai, IndiaProf. Willem H. De Smet, Wilrijk, BelgiumMr. Peter Smetacek, Nainital, IndiaDr. Brian Smith, Iverson Blvd, USADr. Humphrey Smith, Coventry, UKDr. Hema Somanathan, Trivandrum, IndiaDr. C. Srinivasulu, Hyderabad, IndiaDr. Ulrike Streicher, Danang, VietnamDr. K.A. Subramanian, Pune, IndiaMr. K.S. Gopi Sundar, New Delhi, IndiaDr. P.M. Sureshan, Patna, IndiaProf. R. Varatharajan, Imphal, IndiaDr. Karthikeyan Vasudevan, Dehradun, IndiaDr. R.K. Verma, Jabalpur, IndiaDr. W. Vishwanath, Manipur, IndiaDr. Francesco Vitali, rue Münster, LuxembourgDr. E. Vivekanandan, Cochin, IndiaDr. Gernot Vogel, Heidelberg, GermanyDr. Dave Waldien, Austin, USADr. Ted J. Wassenberg, Cleveland, AustraliaDr. Stephen C. Weeks, Akron, USAProf. Yehudah L. Werner, Jerusalem, IsraelMr. Nikhil Whitaker, Mamallapuram, IndiaDr. Andreas Wilting, Berlin, GermanyDr. Hui Xiao, Chaoyang, ChinaDr. April Yoder, Little Rock, USADr. Nathalie Yonow, Swansea, UKEnglish EditorsMrs. Mira Bhojwani, Pune, IndiaDr. Fred Pluthero, Toronto, CanadaJournal of Threatened Taxa is indexed/abstractedin Bibliography of Systematic Mycology, BiologicalAbstracts, BIOSIS Previews, CAB Abstracts, EBSCO,Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Index Fungorum,JournalSeek 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 aISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)November 2012 | Vol. 4 | No. 14 | Pages 3233–3376Date of Publication 26 November 2012 (online & print)CommunicationsCEPF Western Ghats Special SeriesA new genus of the family Theraphosidae (Araneae:Mygalomorphae) with description of three new species from theWestern Ghats of Karnataka, India-- Manju Siliwal, Neha Gupta & Robert Raven, Pp. 3233–3254Additional records of Tettigoniidae from Arunachal Pradesh, India-- G. Srinivasan & D. Prabakar, Pp. 3255–3268CEPF Western Ghats Special SeriesBirds of lower Palni Hills, Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu, India-- Tharmalingam Ramesh, J. Peter Prem Chakravarthi, S. Balachandran& Riddhika Kalle, Pp. 3269–3283Elephant Elephas maximus Linnaeus (Proboscidea: Elephantidae)migration paths in the Nilgiri Hills, India in the late 1970s-- E.R.C. Davidar, Peter Davidar, Priya Davidar & Jean-PhilippePuyravaud, Pp. 3284–3293Wild Water Buffalo Bubalus arnee in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve,Nepal: status, population and conservation importance-- Top Bahadur Khatri, Deep Narayan Shah & Nilamber Mishra, Pp.3294–3301Reassessment of morphology and historical distribution as factorsin conservation efforts for the Endangered Patagonian Huemul DeerHippocamelus bisulcus (Molina 1782)-- Huemul Task Force, Pp. 3302–3311Short CommunicationsCEPF Western Ghats Special SeriesMetazoan community composition in tree hole aquatic habitats ofSilent Valley National Park and New Amarambalam Reserve Forestof the Western Ghats, India-- K.A. Nishadh & K.S. Anoop Das, Pp. 3312–3318Recent sightings of two very rare butterflies, Lethe margaritaeElwes, 1882 and Neptis nycteus de Nicéville, 1890, from Sikkim,eastern Himalaya, India-- Sanjyog Rai, Karma Dorjee Bhutia & Krushnamegh Kunte, Pp.3319–3326Rapid assessment of Wreathed Hornbill Aceros undulatus (Aves:Bucerotidae) populations and conservation issues in fragmentedlowland tropical forests of Arunachal Pradesh, India-- Murali Krishna, Kuladip Sarma & Awadhesh Kumar, Pp. 3342–3348Distribution, den characteristics and diet of the Indian Fox Vulpesbengalensis (Mammalia: Canidae) in Karnataka, India: preliminaryobservations-- H.N. Kumara & Mewa Singh, Pp. 3349–3354Survey of the Fishing Cat Prionailurus viverrinus Bennett, 1833(Carnivora: Felidae) and some aspects impacting its conservationin India-- Shomita Mukherjee, Tiasa Adhya, Prachi Thatte & Uma Ramakrishnan,Pp. 3355–3361NotesFirst record of Okenia pellucida Burn, 1967 (Mollusca:Nudibranchia) from India-- Vishal Bhave & Deepak Apte, Pp. 3362–3365The hitherto undescribed male of Orthozona quadrilineata (Moore,1882) (Lepidoptera: Erebidae)-- Peter Smetacek & I.J. Kitching, Pp. 3366–3368First record of two tubuliferan and four terebrantian species ofThysanoptera (Insecta) from northeastern India-- Kh. Bala, O. Tarunkumar Singh, H. Taptamani & R. Varatharajan, Pp.3369–3372A note on the migration of Dark Cerulean Jamides bochus (Stoll)(Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Eravikulam National Park,Idukki District, Kerala, India-- Muhamed Jafer Palot, Pp. 3373–3374Sighting record of Bengal Florican Houbaropsis bengalensis(Gmelin, 1789) (Aves: Gruiformes: Otididae) in Lower Dibang ValleyDistrict, Arunachal Pradesh, India-- Alolika Sinha, Jillol Hoque, Tilak Pradhan, Manish Kumar Bakshi, JibiPulu, Alok Kumar Singh & M. Firoz Ahmed, Pp. 3375–3376Parambassis waikhomi, a new species of glassfish (Teleostei:Ambassidae) from Loktak Lake, northeastern India-- K. Geetakumari & C. Basudha, Pp. 3327–3332Current status of Marsh Crocodiles Crocodylus palustris (Reptilia:Crocodylidae) in Vishwamitri River, Vadodara City, Gujarat, India-- Raju Vyas, Pp. 3333–3341Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of articles in any mediumfor non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and thesource of publication.