Review Article |
Corresponding author: Muhammad Rais ( sahil@uaar.edu.pk ) Academic editor: Annemarie Ohler
© 2021 Muhammad Rais, Waseem Ahmed, Anum Sajjad, Ayesha Akram, Muhammad Saeed, Hannan Nasib Hamid, Aamina Abid.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Rais M, Ahmed W, Sajjad A, Akram A, Saeed M, Hamid HN, Abid A (2021) Amphibian fauna of Pakistan with notes on future prospects of research and conservation. ZooKeys 1062: 157-175. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1062.66913
|
Research on amphibians and their conservation have gained worldwide attention, as the group includes the highest number of threatened and Data Deficient species when compared to other vertebrates. However, amphibians have long been neglected in wildlife conservation, management decisions, policy making, and research agendas in Pakistan. In this paper, an annotated checklist of the 21 amphibian species of Pakistan, a key to their identification, and detailed discussions on variation in species, including the genera Minervarya and Sphaerotheca, are provided. We found a statistically significant difference in the morphometric measurements of males but non-significant difference in the females of the two forms (rusty dorsum and dotted dorsum) of S. maskeyi. Some genera, such as Microhyla, Uperodon, Minervarya, Allopaa, Chrysopaa, Euphlyctis, Nanorana, and Sphaerotheca, in Pakistan are in need of additional data for molecular and morphological comparisons with taxa in other South Asian countries. The predicaments of amphibian research in Pakistan are discussed, gaps identified, and suggestions are made. Although the occurrence of chytrid fungus in Pakistan is predicted of low likelihood, a lack of data merits studying the prevalence of the fungus, particularly in the northern regions of the country which exhibit complex and dynamic ecosystems. It is recommended that systematic and coordinated surveys are conducted throughout the country to build a database of species occurrences and distributions. Additionally, the monitoring of wild populations and threat mitigation, as well as appropriate legislation, are suggested as long-term measures. By adopting an inclusive wildlife conservation approach in Pakistan, amphibians could be integrated into wildlife conservation and management efforts.
Black-spined toad, Data Deficient, chytrid, endemism, extinction, inclusive conservation, intrinsic value, South Asia
Amphibians are bioindicators of an ecosystem’s health and may also serve as a biological control of crop and forest pests (
The First Herpetological Congress, organized in 1989, presented alarming findings about the decline in amphibian populations which was presumed to have started in the early 1970s in the United States, certain Central American countries, and in northeastern Australia (
This paper provides an annotated checklist of the 21 amphibian species of Pakistan and keys to their identification. The predicaments of amphibian research in Pakistan are discussed and knowledge gaps identified. Suggestions are made on how to proceed with research and conservation of amphibians in the country.
The available historical as well as recent literature on the amphibians of Pakistan was critically reviewed. We collected data on the morphology of 10 amphibian species (N = 158) (Suppl. material
We studied morphological differentiation of the two forms of Sphaerotheca maskeyi: uniform rusty-colored dorsum (n = 9, Fig.
There are 21 species of amphibians (order Anura) in Pakistan, belonging to four families: Bufonidae Gray, 1825, Megophryidae Bonaparte, 1850, Microhylidae Günther, 1858, and Dicroglossidae Dubois, 1987. The identification keys of amphibian families and species of Pakistan are as follows:
1 | Parotid glands present | Bufonidae |
– | Parotid glands absent | 2 |
2 | Pupil vertical | 3 |
– | Pupil horizontal | Dicroglossidae |
3 | Head and mouth narrow, body smooth with few smooth small tubercles | Microhylidae |
– | Head and mouth broad, body heavily warty, a distinct elevated post orbital ridge | Megophryidae |
Bufonidae
1 | Head with cranial crest | 2 |
– | Head without cranial crest | 3 |
2 | Only supraorbital crest, tympanum indistinct |
Duttaphrynus himalayanus (Günther, 1864) (Fig. |
– | Supraorbital, canthal, post orbital, orbitotympanic crest, tympanum distinct Duttaphrynus melanostictus (Schneider, 1799) (Fig. |
|
3 | Interorbital space is smaller or nearly equal to the internarial space | 4 |
– | Interorbital space a little wider than the upper eyelid | 6 |
4 | Parotid glands are inconspicuous, subarticular tubercles single under toes; often double on first, second, and, in some, third finger |
Bufotes baturae ( |
– | Parotid glands conspicuous, toes with double subarticular tubercles | 5 |
5 | Dorsal pattern of longitudinal stripes, three on each side |
Bufotes latastii (Boulenger, 1882) (Fig. |
– | Dorsum gray, with greenish spotting, a dark blotch on the upper eyelid |
Bufotes surdus (Boulenger, 1891) (Fig. |
6 | Tibial gland absent | 7 |
– | Tibial gland present, tarsal fold indicated by weak spinulated line |
Duttaphrynus stomaticus (Lütken, 1864) (Fig. |
7 | Dorsum uniformly olive, interorbital space slightly concave, parotids depressed |
Duttaphrynus olivaceus (Blanford, 1874) (Fig. |
– | Dorsum with green pattern | 8 |
8 | Dorsum with scattered green spots |
Bufotes zugmayeri (Eiselt and Schmidtler, 1973) (Fig. |
– | Dorsum heavily green with occasional light spots, Dorsal tubercles are not so prominent, rather they are flat |
Bufotes pseudoraddei (Mertens, 1971) (Fig. |
A Iranian Toad (Bufotes surdus) B Batura Toad (Bufotes baturae) C Himalayan Toad (Duttaphrynus himalayanus) D Ladakh Toad (Bufotes latastii) E Baloch Green Toad (Bufotes zugmayeri) F Swat Green Toad (Bufotes pseudoraddei). Photographers: Dr Spartak Litvinchuk (A–D, F); Muhammad Sharif Khan (E).
A Asian Common Toad or Black-spined Toad (Duttaphrynus melanostictus)B Olive Toad (Duttaphrynus olivaceus) C Indus Valley Toad (Duttaphrynus stomaticus) D Kashmir Torrent Frog (Allopaa barmoachensis) E Hazara Torrent Frog (Allopaa hazarensis) F Indus Valley Bull Frog (Hoplobatrachus tigerinus). Photographers: Dr Muhammad Rais (A, C, E); Dr Spartak Litvinchuk (B); Muhammad Sharif Khan (D); Janis Czurda (F).
Megophryidae
1 | Head and mouth broad, body heavily warty, a distinct elevated post orbital tuberculate ridge, tympanum indistinct |
Scutiger occidentalis (Dubois, 1978) (Fig. |
Microhylidae
1 | Tongue elliptical, adult <30 mm, body dorsum with elongated, light brown, large, branched blotch |
Microhyla nilphamariensis (Howlader et al., 2015a) (Fig. |
– | Tongue oval, adult 50–60 mm, dorsum with brown reticulation |
Uperodon systoma (Schneider, 1799) (Fig. |
Dicroglossidae
1 | Tympanum indistinct, body dorsum brownish, smooth with a few tubercles on flanks, dark bars on forearm, thighs and shank |
Nanorana vicina (Stoliczka, 1872) (Fig. |
– | Tympanum distinct | 2 |
2 | Toes partially webbed, snout pointed |
Minervarya pierrei (Dubois, 1975) (Fig. |
– | Toes completely webbed | 3 |
3 | Inner metatarsal tubercle shovel-shaped |
Sphaerotheca maskeyi ( |
– | Inner metatarsal tubercle elongate | 4 |
4 | Body dorsum with longitudinal folds and mid-dorsal line |
Hoplobatrachus tigerinus (Daudin, 1802) (Fig. |
– | Body dorsum without longitudinal folds | 5 |
5 | Body pustules large, multispinulate, belly spiny |
Chrysopaa sternosignata (Murray, 1885) (Fig. |
– | Body pustules small, unispinulate, belly spineless | 6 |
6 | Nuptial spines absent | 7 |
– | Nuptial spines present | 8 |
7 | Ventral body spotted, relative length of fingers 4<2<1<3 |
Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis (Schneider, 1799) (Fig. |
– | Ventral body whitish, relative length of fingers 1=2 < 4< 3 |
Euphlyctis kalasgramensis (Howlader et al., 2015b) (Fig. |
8 | Spinules on pustules |
Allopaa barmoachensis (Khan and Tasnim, 1989) (Fig. |
– | Spinules on longitudinal ridges |
Allopaa hazarensis (Dubois and Khan, 1979) (Fig. |
Of the studied 23 morphometric measurements in S. maskeyi, we obtained from our PCA 10 and eight significant variables (r > 0.90) in males having uniform rusty-colored dorsum and having dotted pattern, respectively. We obtained 10 and one significant variables (r > 0.90) in females, respectively. Eigen value, variability (%), cumulative variability (%), and factor loadings of the 23 morphometric measurements are given Table
The multivariate generalized linear model revealed statistically significant difference (F(1, 11) = 1876.60, P = 0.018; Wilk’s Λ = 0.00, partial η2 = 0.97) in the morphometric measurements of males but non-significant in the females (F(13, 11) = 0.944, P = 0.532; Wilk’s Λ = 0.556, partial η2 = 0.444) of the two forms of S. maskeyi.
Eigen value, variability (%), cumulative variability (%) and factor loadings of the 23 morphometric measurements of the two forms (uniform rusty-colored dorsum and dorsum olive with dotted pattern) of Sphaerotheca maskeyi. The factor loadings with absolute correlation values greater than 0.90 were considered significant (in bold).
Male | Uniform rusty-colored dorsum | Dorsum olive with dotted pattern | |||||
F1 | F2 | F3 | F1 | F2 | F3 | ||
Eigenvalue | 10.112 | 7.146 | 5.742 | 14.476 | 2.872 | 1.934 | |
Variability (%) | 43.964 | 31.069 | 24.966 | 62.940 | 12.486 | 8.409 | |
Cumulative % | 43.964 | 75.034 | 100.000 | 62.940 | 75.425 | 83.835 | |
Factor loadings | |||||||
Morphometric measurements | F1 | F2 | F3 | F1 | F2 | F3 | |
Snout–vent length | 0.273 | −0.113 | 0.955 | 0.864 | 0.383 | −0.170 | |
Head width | −0.195 | 0.936 | 0.293 | 0.977 | 0.066 | −0.142 | |
Head length | −0.224 | 0.845 | 0.486 | 0.984 | 0.014 | −0.058 | |
Distance between nostrils | 0.970 | −0.213 | −0.114 | 0.736 | 0.333 | 0.383 | |
Width of upper eyelid | 0.613 | 0.232 | −0.755 | 0.764 | −0.522 | 0.237 | |
Interorbital distance | 0.868 | 0.056 | −0.493 | 0.268 | −0.174 | 0.916 | |
Distance from the back of the mandible to the nostril | 0.003 | 0.919 | 0.393 | 0.754 | 0.521 | −0.286 | |
Distance from the back of the mandible to the front of the eye | 0.070 | 0.856 | −0.513 | 0.826 | −0.300 | −0.059 | |
Distance from the back of the mandible to the back of the eye | −0.488 | 0.677 | −0.552 | 0.853 | −0.465 | −0.174 | |
Distance between the front of the eyes | 0.811 | −0.580 | 0.072 | 0.770 | 0.263 | −0.360 | |
Distance between back of the eyes | 0.964 | 0.005 | −0.266 | 0.286 | 0.603 | 0.624 | |
Distance from the front of the eye to the nostril | 0.901 | 0.430 | −0.054 | 0.827 | 0.106 | 0.030 | |
Eye length | −0.924 | 0.384 | 0.006 | 0.953 | −0.165 | −0.101 | |
Distance from the nostril to the tip of the snout | −0.846 | −0.158 | −0.509 | 0.902 | −0.365 | −0.201 | |
Distance from the front of the eye to the tip of the snout | 0.941 | −0.218 | −0.261 | 0.950 | 0.084 | 0.064 | |
Greatest tympanum diameter | −0.660 | −0.633 | −0.404 | 0.915 | −0.136 | 0.165 | |
Distance from tympanum to the back of the eye | −0.107 | 0.468 | −0.877 | 0.807 | −0.201 | 0.176 | |
Forelimb length | −0.641 | −0.763 | −0.086 | 0.874 | −0.257 | −0.002 | |
Hand length | 0.987 | −0.005 | 0.160 | 0.745 | 0.170 | 0.065 | |
Femur length | 0.639 | 0.627 | −0.446 | 0.829 | −0.006 | −0.187 | |
Shank length | −0.267 | 0.959 | −0.095 | 0.783 | 0.088 | 0.216 | |
Length of tarsus and foot | 0.685 | 0.293 | 0.666 | 0.086 | 0.926 | −0.074 | |
Foot length | −0.033 | 0.252 | 0.967 | 0.731 | 0.313 | −0.012 | |
Female | Uniform rusty−colored dorsum | Dorsum olive with dotted pattern | |||||
F1 | F2 | F3 | F1 | F2 | F3 | ||
Eigenvalue | 12.044 | 5.877 | 4.595 | 12.166 | 4.445 | 2.062 | |
Variability (%) | 52.364 | 25.552 | 19.979 | 52.895 | 19.325 | 8.967 | |
Cumulative % | 52.364 | 77.916 | 97.895 | 52.895 | 72.221 | 81.188 | |
Factor loadings | |||||||
Morphometric measurements | F1 | F2 | F3 | F1 | F2 | F3 | |
Snout–vent length | 0.804 | 0.364 | 0.471 | 0.245 | 0.144 | −0.476 | |
Head width | 0.973 | 0.229 | 0.006 | 0.895 | 0.154 | 0.078 | |
Head length | 0.785 | −0.164 | −0.597 | 0.774 | 0.451 | 0.368 | |
Distance between nostrils | 0.584 | 0.791 | 0.171 | 0.827 | 0.029 | −0.143 | |
Width of upper eyelid | 0.576 | −0.402 | 0.709 | 0.833 | −0.384 | −0.190 | |
Interorbital distance | −0.244 | 0.127 | 0.961 | 0.603 | 0.095 | −0.648 | |
Distance from the back of the mandible to the nostril | 0.790 | 0.320 | −0.476 | 0.659 | 0.097 | 0.673 | |
Distance from the back of the mandible to the front of the eye | 0.766 | −0.614 | −0.190 | 0.786 | 0.160 | 0.412 | |
Distance from the back of the mandible to the back of the eye | 0.860 | −0.509 | −0.030 | 0.881 | −0.332 | 0.194 | |
Distance between the front of the eyes | 0.124 | 0.987 | −0.072 | 0.401 | 0.807 | −0.124 | |
Distance between back of the eyes | −0.919 | 0.285 | 0.272 | −0.045 | 0.897 | −0.309 | |
Distance from the front of the eye to the nostril | 0.381 | 0.925 | −0.014 | 0.546 | 0.575 | 0.014 | |
Eye length | 0.999 | −0.034 | −0.015 | 0.826 | −0.479 | 0.196 | |
Distance from the nostril to the tip of the snout | 0.992 | −0.083 | 0.094 | 0.879 | −0.333 | −0.108 | |
Distance from the front of the eye to the tip of the snout | 0.188 | 0.488 | 0.842 | 0.743 | 0.370 | −0.044 | |
Greatest tympanum diameter | 0.993 | 0.066 | 0.093 | 0.870 | −0.436 | −0.032 | |
Distance from tympanum to the back of the eye | 0.845 | −0.533 | 0.035 | 0.858 | −0.295 | −0.274 | |
Forelimb length | 0.910 | −0.288 | 0.297 | 0.877 | −0.431 | 0.028 | |
Hand length | 0.435 | 0.865 | 0.221 | 0.860 | 0.217 | −0.108 | |
Femur length | 0.219 | −0.156 | 0.961 | 0.731 | 0.154 | −0.382 | |
Shank length | 0.964 | −0.263 | −0.011 | 0.804 | 0.277 | −0.130 | |
Length of tarsus and foot | 0.051 | 0.606 | −0.501 | −0.191 | 0.908 | 0.159 | |
Foot length | 0.657 | 0.623 | −0.422 | 0.672 | 0.442 | 0.344 |
A number of researchers have documented the amphibian fauna of Pakistan;
The true toads of Pakistan are represented by two genera: Duttaphrynus
Considering other taxa,
The inclusion of Uperodon systoma in the list of amphibians of Pakistan is based on two reports.
Pakistan represents the westernmost limit of the geographic range of Duttaphrynus melanostictus. This species has been introduced outside its natural range into many parts of the world, and in these places it is considered a nuisance predator, a potential disease vector, and the cause of many other ecological problems (
The chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis affects amphibians worldwide. The likelihood of this fungus occurring in Pakistan is predicted to be low (<30%) (
There is also a dire need to change social attitudes towards amphibians in our society. This could be achieved by initiating community awareness by outreach, school, and citizen-science programs. While designing research projects, special attention should be given to include components of outreach. For instance, people working in agroecosystems can organize field activities with farmers and local communities. Likewise, the ongoing 10 Billion Tree Tsunami project by the Ministry of Climate Change, Government of Pakistan, should integrate consideration for herpetofauna species, particularly anuran species such as Allopaa hazarensis and Allopaa barmoachensis, which are endemic to forested montane wetlands. The development of android applications and websites could help reach out to the public. This, however, would be limited to those people who have access to the internet, but their participation would inevitably enhance the documentation of species occurrence and distribution records in the country. Collection and archiving quantitative data on anuran abundance would also help determine the current conservation status of our anuran species.
We suggest setting research priorities and to devise strategy for the conservation of amphibians of Pakistan when manageable anthropogenic threats exist, such as habitat destruction, urbanization, pollution, and unsustainable utilization, so that amphibian populations can be better controlled by utilizing less financial, administrative, and human resources. This can be achieved through short-, medium-, and long-term actions. Short-term actions could include the establishment of a network or people currently engaged in amphibian related research. A conservation assessment and management plan workshop should be organized wherein experts and researchers could provide their opinions and draft recommendations for medium- and long-term actions.
A medium-term action plan may include carrying out systematic and coordinated surveys throughout the country to establish a database on occurrence and distribution of species and the identification of their threats. It is recommended to use modern taxonomic tools, such as DNA barcoding, to determine taxonomy and initiate research on phylogenetic affinities, biogeography systematics, especially on endemic species. This approach can expect to yield additional amphibian species as a result. Some genera, such as Microhyla Tschudi, 1838, Uperodon Duméril & Bibron, 1841, Minervarya
Long-term actions would entail monitoring of amphibian populations, threat mitigation, and appropriate legislation. Amphibians have been excluded from all current legislative and policy decisions of the country. The National Climate Change Policy (
Wildlife conservation projects in Pakistan mainly focus on carnivores, ungulates, and birds.
The data underpinning the analysis reported in this paper are deposited in the Dryad Data Repository at Dryad (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.mkkwh7118).
We are thankful to Paul Freed (USA) for proofreading earlier drafts of this manuscript. We wish to thank Dr Don Driscoll, Deakin University, Australia and Dr. Spartak Litvinchuk, Russian Academy of Sciences for their valuable suggestions and Russell Gray, Science Advisor. Save Vietnam’s Wildlife for improving the text on amphibian infectious diseases. We owe a deep sense of gratitude to Amphibian Survival Alliance for financial assistance through Future Leaders in Amphibian Conservation Program (https://www.amphibians.org/what-we-do/acrs/future-leaders-award/).
Supplementary tables
Data type: statistical data
Explanation note: Table S1. Sample ID and Snout-vent length of samples examined. Table S2a. Descriptive statistics of morphometric measurements of Sphaerotheca maskeyi (male). Table S2b. Descriptive statistics of morphometric measurements of Sphaerotheca maskeyi (female).