Taprobanica (2012) Vol. 4. No. 1. Pages 01-59

Published date: 28th, May 2012

TAPROBANICA the Journal of Asian Biodiversity ISSN 1800-427X - Volume 04, Number 01, pp. 1-59, Pls. 2.

© 2012, Taprobanica Private Limited, Jl. Kuricang 18 Gd.9 No.47, Ciputat 15412, Tangerang, Indonesia

- Editor-In-Chief - THASUN AMARASINGHE

[email protected]

- Deputy Editors - NIKI AMARASINGHE

[email protected]

MOHOMED BAHIR [email protected]

SURANJAN KARUNARATHNA [email protected]

- Associate Editor - MADHAVA BOTEJUE

- Sectional Editors -

(Restricted fields & geographic regions included after the names)

Zoological nomenclature ALAIN DUBOIS COLIN GROVES

SVEN KULLANDER

Gastrointestinal parasites COLIN CHAPMAN

Snails

BRENDEN HOLLAND (land) ARAVIND MADHYASTHA (aquatic)

Branchiopod crustaceans

MIGUEL ALONSO B. K. SHARMA (SA)

Freshwater crabs

MOHOMED BAHIR

Cerambycid beetles EDUARD VIVES

Geotrupid beetles

OLIVER HILLERT

Odonata DO MANH CUONG

Orthoptera

HOJUN SONG

Lepidoptera & other insect groups JEFFREY MILLER

Fish taxonomy

SVEN KULLANDER

Fish ecology UPALI AMARASINGHE

REMADEVI SUJAN HENKANATHTHEGEDARA

Amphibian taxonomy FRANKY BOSSUYT

BIJU DAS (S-A) DJOKO ISKANDAR (S-EA)

ENRIQUE LA MARCA KELUM MANAMENDRA-ARACHCHI

JODI ROWLEY (S-EA)

Amphibian ecology JODI ROWLEY

Reptile taxonomy AARON BAUER (SA)

DJOKO ISKANDAR (S-EA) ANDRE' KOCH (S-EA)

RICHARD WAHLGREN YEHUDAH WERNER (S-WA)

Reptile ecology

RUCHIRA SOMAWEERA YEHUDAH WERNER (S-WA)

Agamid lizards

NATALIA ANANJEVA

Crocodiles RUCHIRA SOMAWEERA

RALF SOMMERLAD (S-EA) NIKHIL WHITAKER (SA)

Geckos / skinks / lacertids

AARON BAUER JOHN RUDGE (Geckos - SA)

Snakes

GERNOT VOGEL

Testudines UWE FRITZ

HANS-DIETER PHILIPPEN

Varanid lizards ANDRE' KOCH

Bird taxonomy

BRUCE BEEHLER

Bird ecology BRUCE BEEHLER

SUJAN HENKANATHTHEGEDARA SARATH KOTAGAMA (SA)

VINCENT NIJMAN (birds of prey)

Mammal taxonomy COLIN GROVES

Mammal ecology

COLIN CHAPMAN LEE HARDING (S-EA)

Chiroptera

JUDITH EGER

Primates COLIN CHAPMAN ANNA NEKARIS

VINCENT NIJMAN JATNA SUPRIATNA (S-EA)

Mammal diseases

COLIN CHAPMAN

Fungi taxonomy KEVIN HYDE

DON REYNOLDS RAM K. VERMA

Fungi ecology

RAM K. VERMA

Plant taxonomy H. KATHRIARACHCHI

Plant ecology

SUDHEERA RANWALA

Plant physiology & biotechnology PRASAD SENADHEERA

Zoo biogeography

BRENDEN HOLLAND (Snails) JEFFREY MILLER (Insects)

LAUREN CHAPMAN (Pisces) RAFE BROWN (Herps) ANDRE' KOCH (Herps)

ENRIQUE LA MARCA (Herps) BRUCE BEEHLER (Birds)

COLIN GROVES (Mammals)

General ecology & conservation LEE HARDING

SUJAN HENKANATHTHEGEDARA SARATH KOTAGAMA (SA) ROBERT STUEBING (S-EA)

Zoo-archeology & paleontology SURATISSA DISSANAYAKE

COLIN GROVES KELUM MANAMENDRA-ARACHCHI

Geology ROHAN FERNANDO

Water resources

MOHOMED NAJIM (SA)

1 TAPROBANICA VOL. 04: NO. 01

EDITORIAL

How embarrassing can it get? Or: Taxonomy undermined

Systematics is the science of the diversity of organisms (Mayr, 1969) (Abbreviated from Simpson, 1961: “Systematics is the scientific study of the kinds and diversity of

organisms and of any and all relationships among them”)

Taxonomy is the theory and practice of classifying organisms (Mayr, 1969) Whereas biological systematics and taxonomy are probably about the same kind of scientific enterprise, they were separated by Ernst Mayr in his classical text book, and taxonomy became cemented as a subset of systematics. A little over 40 years have passed since these definitions were expressed, and the work in which they appeared has become obsolete with the appearance of new technology and new philosophy about what are the fundamental aspects of species and higher taxa, especially with the development of phylogenetic systematics and facility of studying factors of inheritance at molecular level. Nevertheless, biological systematics remains the fundamental powerful scientific domain for understanding and expressing biological diversity, and keeps its definitions.

Thus systematists employ taxonomic tools for naming and classifying organisms according to the results of research on phylogenetic relationships and species characteristics. In Zoology, naming is governed by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999). Names proposed by systematists are used widely beyond the scientific domain, in legislation, in hobby, in commerce, and in lieu of popular names. The Code, together with its predecessors dating to the 19th Century, has proven fully capable of being a stable framework for naming of animals, covering nomenclature from 1758 until today, and into the future. One would expect that the process of naming organisms would be carefully worked out by conscientious and responsible senior level scientists looking both to the good of society and the usefulness in the science domain of society.

Instead of finding nomenclature observed with seriousness, and taxonomy based on research and insightful experience with the taxa concerned, species taxonomy lamentably has to some extent become a playground for those infected by the pandemic mihi itch (Evenhuis, 2008), the illness that produces in its victim a craving to publish new names without doing the necessary background work, also known as nominomania (Trewavas, 1957). The problem here is that (a) by tradition, and provisions in the Code, scientific names of genera and species can have their authors’ names appended to them; and (b) once a name has been made available according to the Code, it cannot be ignored, changed or reverted, no matter how mistaken the description or unidentifiable the species may be. The mihi itch is also expressed in restless re-naming of junior homonyms (Trewavas, 1957).

In ichthyology, the mihi itch has mostly been identified in European and, to a lesser extent, North American aquarists. Aquaristic excursions in nomenclature were treated recently by Kullander (2011a). Inspiration for this editorial comes, however, from an unexpected source, from the recent surge in taxonomic student papers of very low quality, published in tropical countries, and mainly concerned with publishing supposedly new species. Why are they doing that? One explanation seems to be supervisors who somehow need papers and deliberately allow students to mess themselves up, the student taking all the risk of a curtailed career in biology. Another explanation may be that describing new species is considered such easy game for a publication that no training at all is needed. That shows up as embarrassing, for people, for nations, for science.

Supervisor co-authorship of student papers is not necessarily a bad thing, and usually the supervisor provides considerable intellectual matter for the final manuscript. One then also usually can expect the supervisor to have re-measured every fish and checked every word of the article.

TAPROBANICA, ISSN 1800-427X. April, 2012. Vol. 04, No. 01: pp. 1-4. © Taprobanica Private Limited, Jl. Kuricang 18 Gd.9 No.47, Ciputat 15412, Tangerang, Indonesia.

EDITORIAL


Particularly the taxonomy of groups of small fish species of interest to aquarists, already messy and difficult to analyze, is now made more intractable.There is no need here to point out any special person or taxon, however. Criticism of particular papers must be restricted to scientific publications, and should be backed up with facts. So far, there is very little of this matter, but see Kullander (2011b), and Říčan et al. (2011) for recent examples, and Trewavas (1946) for some more dated ones. It is relevant, however to reflect on what systematics is, what is required from descriptive taxonomy, and how taxonomic education can be boosted. Who can do taxonomy, for whom, and why?

Biological systematics is a scientific discipline, which requires scientific training – in biological systematics. For qualified work on taxonomy in any group, that usually means a PhD obtained under supervision of a major professor or other senior scientist. Even that is not a guarantee for quality work. One would need a few more research years to achieve sufficient familiarity with methods and organisms to be able to make useful impact. Why do some think they can do without the necessary scientific training? Lack of training of course limits understanding of the procedure; add to that the mihi itch, irresponsibility of supervisors, and deficient peer review. Not to forget the low status of taxonomy at universities and difficulty of finding the necessary training. To the unknowing, much of descriptive taxonomy also looks simple - count a few fin rays and scales, make some proportional measurements, and a colour description, over with it.

Whereas a professional analysis commonly takes years to complete, especially because so much comparative material may need to be examined, it is indeed possible to get away with something done in 5 minutes by submitting some words and a photo of a fish to an aquarium magazine. Whereas the conclusions may be right or wrong, scientists and legislators may not have a clue to what species has been named. We now also see similar quick-and-dirty descriptions coming from academic addresses in biodiversity-rich countries. Are we at the brink of a major crisis in tropical fish taxonomy where aquarists, undergraduate students and others are deliberately producing would-be taxonomic work without adequate training even in writing a paper? Maybe it is high time to straighten up things, starting with editors, reviewers, and readers. Regain a very rigid scientific look at how taxonomy is performed and put as much requirement on taxonomic work as on any other scientific study. And look also at the responsibility involved in the privilege of being able to name things.

Systematic scientific ethics is partly formulated by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999), which says, in Appendix D, Code of Ethics:

1. Authors proposing new names should observe the following principles, which together constitute

a "Code of Ethics". 2. A zoologist should not publish a new name if he or she has reason to believe that another person

has already recognized the same taxon and intends to establish a name for it (or that the taxon is to be named in a posthumous work). A zoologist in such a position should communicate with the other person (or their representatives) and only feel free to establish a new name if that person has failed to do so in a reasonable period (not less than a year).

3. A zoologist should not publish a new replacement name (a nomen novum) or other substitute

name for a junior homonym when the author of the latter is alive; that author should be informed of the homonymy and be allowed a reasonable time (at least a year) in which to establish a substitute name.

4. No author should propose a name that, to his or her knowledge or reasonable belief, would be

likely to give offence on any grounds. 5. Intemperate language should not be used in any discussion or writing which involves zoological

nomenclature and all debates should be conducted in a courteous and friendly manner. 6. Editors and others responsible for the publication of zoological papers should avoid publishing

any material which appears to them to contain a breach of the above principles. 7. The observation of these principles is a matter for the proper feelings and conscience of individual

zoologists and the Commission is not empowered to investigate or rule upon alleged breaches of them.

EDITORIAL


That can be considered minimal ethics for a taxonomist. Special responsibilities of scientists have been expressed recently by Bourne & Barbour (2011), apparently with reason, and should be instructive for students in training in taxonomy. For the most part ethically sound behavior in science is just normal human behavior: Don’t steal other people’s ideas, don’t omit citing relevant references (unless they would be embarrassing to that author, perhaps), don’t submit manuscripts just to see if they get accepted despite errors and sloppiness, don’t lie, don’t cheat. And above all: learn the profession first. It certainly helps if one can avoid duplicate work and publish in one’s own words instead of copying everything but a few details from other papers. In this journal, Dubois (2010) discussed the quality of taxonomic papers and how to properly name species, with numerous useful references; and Werner (2011) addressed the requirements of scientific writing. In short, a good paper has more than just a name and diagnosis; it has a soul, a purpose, and a life beyond future revisions. Scientific research is largely about communication.

It is the reader who is the important agent, the user of the information, not the paper, not the author. This is evident not least in my participation in the building of Fish Base (Froese & Pauly, 2012) as an information system for all fishes. What do we do with nomenclatural scam? List it and hope somebody quickly revises it; hide it; or list it with reservations? Either way one risks spreading disinformation. The goal of Fish Base is to present only relevant and reliable information; the weak point then is bad taxonomy, and considerable effort goes into evaluating what information can actually be used in taxonomic papers. The problems we have, of course, are shared with others compiling information on biodiversity. It would be more natural if they all were scientifically sound and completely useful… And what we need and want are thorough revisions, not only more names.

Biodiversity rich countries in general are as poor (or poorer) in systematists who are experts on local fauna as North America and Europe. This has been pointed out by Skelton& Swartz (2011) for Africa. In Brazil, on the other hand, as an excellent example of a positive development, the number of fish taxonomists is rather growing and the quality of the work is exemplary (Skelton & Swartz, 2011). The explanation is partly in the availability of funding for research, as well as gifted biologists, but can also be traced to the expert training of the now leading Brazilian ichthyologists in excellent institutions in the United States and the continued collaboration of them and their students with European and North American colleagues. Personally, I believe that is the major lesson to be learned: engagement in and training in a rich academic context. We don’t need “parataxonomists”, or nominomanics, we need scientists able to integrate systematics, taxonomy and other biodiversity disciplines.

There are no shortcuts, no easy ways out or to avoid learning a profession, at least not if you need a good reputation to continue studies or apply for attractive positions. As a student, get yourself an experienced supervisor who is well recognized in the scientific community. Stay away from quick and dirty species descriptions. Learn the profession by doing revisions, using morphological and molecular methodology, learning as you move on. Publish only when you are ready.

An important function of the PhD period is to train the perceptive senses. More than a few ichthyologists have described to me how they worked for years discovering nothing, until finally characters kept started falling over them. It takes considerable training until one can actually see what is important. Neil Shubin in his early training as a field paleaeontologist put it simply: “I finally saw it” (Shubin, 2009). This is also my experience. Going from cichlids to cyprinids requires a completely new vision. Even shifting between African and South American cichlids requires a total restart of the way one looks for characters. No wonder very few people master more than one family or genus of organisms over an extended period.

Whereas some supervisors may disagree, student supervision is not about having an assistant helping with publication, but it is entirely about educating an independent scientist adhering to scientific principles, methodology, and ethics. This goal may be reached in numerous ways, including participation in the supervisor’s project. Nevertheless, there are always points in time in a trainee’s progress, when more training is required before a certain task can be entrusted to the student. And that is why PhD careers in general follow a plan with well-defined milestones and mid-term evaluation.

Nevertheless, it is quite clear that pressure to publish (or perish) is compromising all biological science. As seniors and supervisors, it is time to have a close look at this and work with editors, students, and authors to bring taxonomy back to the scientific high standard it requires. Having done all the mistakes hinted at here, and learned from them, my vision is that biological journals (editors, reviewers, readers) take a more serious attitude toward taxonomic work. One major goal of Taprobanica is indeed to promote professional taxonomic publication on Asian organisms (Amarasinghe, 2009). As a reader, you already

EDITORIAL


support this goal. But we still want to hear your opinion about species taxonomy, and what you expect from species descriptions. Write to us at <[email protected]>

I am grateful to Roberto E. Reis and Colin Groves for constructive comments on the manuscript.

Literature cited Amarasinghe, A. A. T., 2009. Editorial: An introduction to Taprobanica. Taprobanica, 1 (1): 1. Bourne, P. E. and V. Barbour, 2011. Ten simple rules for building and maintaining a scientific reputation. PLOS Computational Biology, 7 (6): 1-2. Dubois, A., 2010. Describing new species. Taprobanica, 2 (1): 6-24. Evenhuis, N. L., 2008. The "Mihi itch" - a brief history. Zootaxa, 1890: 59-68. Froese, R. and D. Pauly (eds.), 2012. FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication <www.fishbase.org>, version (04/2012). International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, Fourth Edition. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London: xxix+306. Kullander, S. O., 2011a. Nomenclatural availability of putative scientific generic names applied to the South American cichlid fish Apistogramma ramirezi Myers & Harry, 1948 (Teleostei: Cichlidae). Zootaxa, 3131: 35-51. Kullander, S. O., 2011b. A review of Dicrossus foirni and Dicrossus warzeli, two species of cichlid fishes from the Amazon River basin in Brazil (Teleostei: Cichlidae). Aqua, 17: 73-94. Mayr, E., 1969. Principles of Systematic Zoology. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York: xi+428. Říčan, O., L. Piálek, A. Almirón and J. Casciotta, 2011. Two new species of Australoheros (Teleostei: Cichlidae), with notes on diversity of the genus and biogeography of the Río de la Plata basin. Zootaxa, 2982: 1-26. Shubin, N., 2009. Your inner fish. Penguin Books, London: ix+237. Simpson, G. G., 1961. Principles of Animal Taxonomy. Columbia University Press, New York: xii+247. Skelton, P. H. and E. R. Swartz, 2011. Walking the tightrope: trends in African freshwater systematic ichthyology. Journal of Fish Biology, 79: 1413-1435. Trewavas, E., 1946. The types of African cichlid fishes described by Borodin in 1931 and 1936, and of two species described by Boulenger in 1901. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 116, part II: 240-246. Trewavas, E., 1957. Nominomania. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (12), 10: 349-350. Werner, Y. L., 2011. Editorial: A splitter’s systematics of writing: scientific writing and writing English are separate issues and this has implication. Taprobanica, 3 (1): 1-4. Sven O Kullander Sectional Editor: Taprobanica, the journal of Asian Biodiversity May 3rd, 2012 Associate Professor, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University Senior Curator of Ichthyology & Herpetology Swedish Museum of Natural History P.O. Box 50007, SE-104 05 Stockholm SWEDEN

4

A NEW LOACH OF Physoschistura FROM TUIVAI RIVER - INDIA


Physoschistura tuivaiensis, A NEW SPECIES OF LOACH (TELEOSTEI: NEMACHEILIDAE) FROM THE TUIVAI RIVER, MANIPUR, INDIA Sectional Editor: Sven O Kullander Submitted: 18 December 2011, Accepted: 22 May 2012

Yumnam Lokeshwor1,3, Waikhom Vishwanath1,4 and Keisham Shanta2 1 Department of Life Sciences, Manipur University, Canchipur, Imphal 795 003, Manipur, India 2 Department of Zoology, L. Sanoi College, Nambol, Manipur, India Emails: 3 [email protected], 4 [email protected] Abstract: Physoschistura tuivaiensis is described from Likhailok on the Tuivai River, a tributary of the Brahmaputra River in southern Manipur, India. It is distinguished from congeneric species except P. shanensis and P. yunnaniloides by having a complete lateral line. It can be distinguished from those two species by the presence of 12-14 dark olivaceous blotches on the flank, and 15-17 dark olivaceous saddles on the back, more branched caudal fin rays, and 4+8 pores in the infraorbital canal. Examination of the holotype of Physoschistura elongata shows lip morphology different from Physoschistura, and the species is referred tentatively to Schistura. Key words: Anatomy, freshwater, morphology, taxonomy, Brahmaputra River. Introduction The nemacheilid genus Physoschistura Bănărescu & Nalbant, 1982 comprises species of small adult size, shorter than 60 mm standard length. The genus is characterized by the unique mouth shape, with a strongly arched mouth, its width 1.5-2.0 times that of length, and the lower lip presenting a median interruption separating two lateral, broadly triangular pads with deep, nearly parallel furrows (Chen et al., 2011; Kottelat, 1990). The two halves of the air-bladder capsule are joined and coalescent on their inner face, the posterior chamber of the air bladder well developed, open posteriorly, more or less conical, and in direct contact with the capsule (Singh et al. 1982; Bănărescu & Nalbant, 1995), but

this condition is also present in Schistura similis Kottelat, 1990 and Yunnanilus brevis (Boulenger, 1893) (Kottelat, 1990). Seven species of Physoschistura are currently treated as valid, viz., P. brunneana (Annandale, 1918), P. elongata Sen & Nalbant, 1982, P. pseudobrunneana Kottelat, 1990, P. raoe (Hora, 1929), P. rivulicola (Hora, 1929), P. shanensis (Hora, 1929) and P. yunnaniloides Chen, Kottelat & Neely, 2011, with a combined geographical distribution encompassing both lentic and lotic habitats in the upper parts of the Brahmaputra, Irrawaddy, Salween, and Mekong River drainages (Kottelat, 1990; Chen et al., 2011). The Tuivai River, a tributary of the Brahmaputra,


A NEW LOACH FROM TUIVAI RIVER - INDIA


flows from east to west in between Manipur and Myanmar and then between Manipur and Mizoram, India. The river then flows northward and joins the Barak River at Tipaimukh. The ichthyofaunal diversity of the Tuivai River is poorly explored. Vishwanath & Shanta (2004) described Badis tuivaiei from the Tuivai River basin. Examination of specimens collected by K. Shanta Devi in MUMF and from our own collection revealed an unnamed nemacheilid species which conforms to the generic characters mentioned above and the objective of the present paper is to provide formal description of this species. Materials and Methods Measurements were made point to point with dial callipers on the left side of the body and recorded to nearest 0.1 mm. Measurements follow Kottelat (1990). Subunits of the head are presented as proportions of head length. Head length itself and measurements of body parts are given as proportions of standard length (SL). Illustrations were made on the images captured by using a Leica DFC 425 fitted on a Leica stereo-zoom microscope S8APO. The specimens are deposited in the Manipur University Museum of Fishes (MUMF), Imphal, Manipur, India. Examined specimens for comparison belong to the collections of Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Kolkata, and Zoological Survey of India Eastern Research Station (ZSI/ ERS), Shillong. Results

Physoschistura tuivaiensis, new species (Fig. 1, Table 1)

Holotype: MUMF 5089: adult female (46.0 mm SL); Tuivai River at Likhailok (24° 04' 41'' N, 93° 33' 67'' E, altitude 635 m a.s.l.), Churchandpur district, Manipur, India (Brahmaputra basin); Y. Lokeshwor and party, 20 December 2011. Paratypes (7 specimens): MUMF 5082, adult female (45.2 mm SL); MUMF 5083, adult female (44.7 mm SL); MUMF 5084, adult female (42.6 mm SL); MUMF 5085, adult male (40.9 mm SL); MUMF 5086, adult male (40.9 mm SL); MUMF 5087 (Fig. 1B), adult male (40.8 mm SL); MUMF 5088, adult male (37.4 mm SL); Tuivai River, locality not given (24° 07' 17" N, 93° 19' 41" E, altitude 481 m a.s.l.), Churchandpur district, Manipur, India (Brahmaputra basin); K. Shanta Devi, 5 May 2004.

Diagnosis: Physoschistura tuivaiensis is distinguished from all other known species of Physoschistura except P. shanensis and P. yunnaniloides by having a complete lateral line. It is easily distinguishable from P. shanensis by having 12-14 (vs. 8) dark olivaceous blotches on flank; presence (vs. absence) of 15-17 dark olivaceous saddles on back; 8½ (vs. 9½) branched dorsal fin rays, 10 (vs. 12) pectoral fin rays, and 8+7 (vs. 8+8) branched caudal fin rays; 4+8 (vs. 4+11) pores in infraorbital canal, and 9 (vs. 6) supraorbital canal. It also differs from P. yunnaniloides in having 12-14 blotches (vs. 18-20 bars) on flank, presence (vs. absence) of free posterior air chamber and 8+7 (vs. 8+8) branched caudal fin rays. Further it is easily recognizable in having the following combination of character states: 4 simple and 8½ branched rays in dorsal fin; axillary pelvic lobe well formed; suborbital flaps in males; 4+8 pores in infraorbital canal; and interrupted black basicaudal bar with an upper small oblique bar and a lower vertically elongated bar. Etymology: The specific epithet derives from the type locality of the species, the Tuivai River. Description: Body moderately elongate, dorsal profile slightly arched, depth gently increasing from tip of snout to dorsal fin base, thereafter sloping evenly up to caudal fin base. Body slightly compressed anteriorly and more compressed posteriorly. Ventral profile straight throughout. Head depressed. Snout pointed, about twice length of eye diameter. Dorsal fin with four simple and 8½ branched rays (N=8), articulated almost equidistantly between tip of snout and caudal base, slightly in advance of pelvic fin origin. Dorsal fin height almost equal to head width at cheek. Distal margin of dorsal fin straight. Anal fin with three simple and 5½ branched rays (N=8), reaching caudal fin origin when adpressed. Pectoral fin with one simple and nine branched rays (N=8), articulated horizontally to vertical axis of the body, almost equal to dorsal head length, reaching about two-thirds distance to pelvic fin origin. Pelvic fin with one simple and seven branched rays (N=8); origin vertical below second branched dorsal fin ray, reaching to or beyond vent but not touching anal fin origin when adpressed, leaving a gap as wide as eye diameter. Axillary pelvic fin lobe well formed. Caudal fin with 8+7 branched rays (N=8), forked, lobes equal in length. Caudal peduncle 1.1-1.4 times longer

LOKESHWOR ET AL., 2012


than deep, with low dorsal and ventral adipose crests on posterior half. Body covered with slightly embedded minute scales. Ventral surface of prepelvic area devoid of scales. Lateral line complete, with 75 (N=2), 77 (N=1), 80 (N=3), 81 (N=1), 82 (N=1) pores. Cephalic lateral line system with nine supraorbital, 4+8 infraorbital, nine preoperculo-mandibular and three supratemporal pores. Unculi present on lips, barbels, throat, snout and pectoral fin rays. Anterior nostril in front of low flap-like tube. Mouth strongly arched, about 1.5–2.2 times wider than long; lips quite thin, upper lip with small median incision and numerous shallow lateral

furrows. Lower lip with wide median interruption, forming two lateral broadly triangular pads with furrows on either side (Fig. 2). Processus dentiformis present, not prominent. Shallow median notch present in lower jaw. Free posterior chamber of air bladder well formed, not encapsulated, slightly oval (Fig. 3). Inner rostral barbel reaching to point vertical of posterior margin of nostril; outer one reaching to vertical of posterior margin of orbit. Maxillary barbel reaching beyond vertical of posterior margin of orbit. Intestine without loop but with L-bend little behind stomach (Fig. 4). Sexual dimorphism: Prominent spoon-shaped suborbital flap present in males (Fig. 5).

Figure 1: Physoschistura tuivaiensis: (A) holotype MUMF 5089, female (46.0 mm SL); (B) paratype MUMF 5087, male (40.8 mm SL); (C) MUMF 5090 in life (43.7 mm SL).



Table: 1 Morphometric data of holotype and seven paratypes of Physoschistura tuivaiensis in mm except for standard length.

Holotype Range

(holotype and paratypes)

Mean SD

Standard length (mm) 46.0 37.4–46.0 % SL

Body depth 19.6 17.2–20.1 18.4 1.1 Head depth at nape 16.1 13.9–16.1 14.5 0.7 Head depth at eye 13.0 11.4–13.6 12.1 0.8 Dorsal head length 21.5 21.5–24.5 23.6 1.0 Lateral head length 24.1 24.1–27.3 26.0 0.9 Caudal peduncle length 15.4 12.7–16.4 14.4 1.3 Caudal peduncle height 11.3 10.5–11.3 11.0 0.2 Predorsal length 49.1 49.3–52.8 50.5 1.4 Prepelvic length 52.2 51.9–55.3 53.4 1.2 Preanus length 73.7 69.0–73.7 71.2 1.7 Preanal length 78.7 76.7–80.3 78.9 1.1 Dorsal fin height 17.4 14.7–17.4 15.9 1.0 Anal fin depth 18.5 15.6–20.2 18.3 1.5 Pectoral fin length 22.0 21.1–24.6 23.0 1.1 Pelvic fin length 19.3 18.3–20.9 19.3 1.0 Maximum head width 16.1 14.9–16.5 15.7 0.6 Head width at nares 10.2 9.8–10.4 10.2 0.2 Body width at dorsal fin origin 15.7 12.2–15.7 13.5 1.1 Body width at anal fin origin 9.3 6.9–9.3 8.0 0.8

% Head length Snout length 45.5 43.4-49.7 46.8 2.0 Interorbital distance 27.3 27.3–32.7 31.2 2.0 Eye diameter 23.2 19.0–25.0 22.5 2.0 Mouth gape width 33.3 27.1–33.3 29.0 3.0 Maximum head width 74.7 60.8–74.7 66.6 4.0 Head width at nares 47.5 41.0–47.5 43.4 2.0

Figure 2: Ventral view of mouth of Physoschistura tuivaiensis. Scale bar = 1.0 mm.

Figure 3: Ventral view of swim bladder of Physoschistura tuivaiensis, showing free posterior chambers. Scale bar = 1.0 mm.

8

LOKESHWOR ET AL., 2012


Figure 4: Ventral view of intestine of Physoschistura tuivaiensis, showing coiling pattern. Scale bar = 1.0 mm. Figure 5: Head of male Physoschistura tuivaiensis showing suborbital flap. Scale bar = 1.0 mm. Colour in life (Fig. 1C): Body yellowish brown. 12–14 vertically elongated dark olivaceous blotches on flank, originating from lateral line or slightly above, extending ventrally across lower side but not reaching belly. 15–17 dark olivaceous saddles extending from dorsal mid-line to one-third of flank, some of which bifurcate as they reach flank, sometimes alternate and interrupted with blotches forming a sliding appearance with each other anteriorly. Dorsal and dorso-lateral portion of head mottled with irregular dark olivaceous spots. Black caudal bar fragmented into an upper short oblique bar and a lower vertically elongated bar. No black spot present at base of dorsal fin rays but last simple dorsal ray with two black spots of which a large proximal one at one-third distance from base and another smaller distal one at two-thirds distance from base. Two faintly marked black spots on

branched dorsal fin rays, of which one at half distance from and another at four-fifths distance from base. Anal and pelvic fins marked with two rows of faint black spots at about half and two-thirds of their length from base. Pectoral fin rays dark brown. Caudal fin rays with two rows of pale black spots, forming a V on caudal fin at about half and three-fifths of length from base. Sexes isochromatic. Colour in preservative: Background colour creamy whitish on body. Spots and blotches light brown. Spots on fins faint brownish. Distribution: Physoschistura tuivaiensis is known only from two localities in the Tuivai River in the Churchandpur district. The type locality is Likhailok (Fig. 6), but the second locality was not recorded precisely. Discussion Kottelat (1990) revised Physoschistura, with detailed descriptions and illustrations of the five species then known. He was only uncertain about P. elongata, the description of which did not conform well with information from the other species. The only addition after 1990 was P. yunnaniloides (Chen et al., 2011). Bănărescu & Nalbant (1995) placed P. raoe in Schistura McClelland, 1838. Most species of Physoschistura are known only from one or few localities, implying either very restricted distribution or insufficient collection. The majority of the species are found in the Irrawaddy and Salween drainages in Myanmar (Physoschistura brunneana, P. raoe, P. rivulicola, P. shanensis, P. yunnaniloides), and notably not less than three species are known from Inlé Lake and nearby He Ho in the Salween drainage (P. brunneana, P. rivulicola, P. shanensis) (Kottelat, 1990). Physoschistura raoe was described from Mong Yai, on a tributary to the Irrawaddy, but reported also from Mengla by Kottelat (1990). Physoschistura yunnaniloides is known only from Kalaymyo, in the lower Chindwin drainage, and P. pseudobrunneana was described from the Mekong and Mae Nam Ping basins. Physoschistura elongata was described from from the Brahmaputra drainage in Meghalaya. We examined the holotype of P. elongata in ZSI/ERS. The specimen is very small and looks like a juvenile. The paratypes are not traceable. The lip structure of the holotype does not conform to that of

9



Physoschistura as presented by Kottelat (1990) and Banarescu & Nalbant (1995). It is more like that of a Schistura. The generic allocation of the species by Sen & Nalbant (in Singh et al., 1982) is thus doubtful, pending examination of fresh specimens, and we meanwhile tentatively refer it to Schistura. In addition to lip characters, P. tuivaiensis differs from S. elongata by more simple rays in the anal fin (3 vs. 2), more rays in the pelvic fin (8 vs. 7), and 8+7 vs. 8–9+8 branched caudal fin rays. The air bladder condition in Physoschistura tuivaiensis conforms to the generic diagnosis (Bănărescu & Nalbant, 1995; Kottelat, 1990), but the condition has not been verified in all species because too few specimens are available, and a free posterior chamber is not present in P. yunnaniloides (Chen et al., 2011).

Physoschistura tuivaiensis, besides having a complete lateral line, differs from congeneric species with incomplete lateral line (P. brunneana, P. pseudobrunneana P. rivulicola, P. raoe) in having fewer branched caudal fin rays (8+7 vs. 8–9+8) and fewer total pectoral fin rays (10 vs. 11). It is further distinguished from P. rivulicola in having 12–14 blotches (vs. 11 bars) on the flanks, 9 (vs. 7) pores in supraorbital and 4+8 (vs. 4+10) pores in infraorbital canals; from P. raoe in having 12–14 blotches (vs. 18 bars) on the flanks, 9 (vs. 6) pores in supraorbital and 4+8 (vs. 4+11) pores in infraorbital canals; from P. brunneana in having a fewer branched dorsal fin rays (8½ vs. 9½) and in presence (vs. absence) of well formed axillary pelvic lobe; and from P. pseudobrunneana in having 9 (vs. 6) pores in supraorbital canal and in presence (vs. absence) of a shallow median notch in the lower jaw.

Figure 6: Map of the state of Manipur, showing type locality of Physoschistura tuivaiensis (black star).

10

A NEW LOACH OF Physoschistura FROM TUIVAI RIVER - INDIA


Comparative Materials: Physoschistura rivulicola: Holotype, ZSI F11060/1, 48 mm SL, He-Ho, Shan State, Myanmar (poor state of preservation). Physoschistura raoe: Holotype, ZSI F11062/1, 28.3 mm SL, Mong Yai, Shan State, Myanmar. Physoschistura elongata: Holotype, ZSI V/ERS3063, 29.0 mm SL, Barapani (Brahmaputra Basin), Meghalaya, India. Published information used for comparison: Kottelat (1990) for Physoschistura brunneana, P. pseudobrunneana and P. shanensis, and Chen et al. (2011) for P. yunnaniloides. Acknowledgements: We are very grateful to Amal Krishna Karmakar and Nibedita Sen for permission to examine materials in ZSI, Kolkata and ZSI/ERS, Shillong, respectively. We thank Tan Heok Hui (National University of Singapore) and Remadevi (ZSI) for reviewing the manuscript. Literature Cited: Bănărescu, P. M. and T. T. Nalbant, 1995. A generical classification of Nemacheilinae with description of two new genera (Teleostei: Cypriniformes: Cobitidae). Travaux du Museum d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa”, 35: 429–496. Chen, X-Y., M. Kottelat and D. A. Neely, 2011. Physoschistura yunnaniloides, a new species of loach from Myanmar (Teleostei: Nemacheilidae). Ichthyological Exploration of Freshwaters, 22 (2): 179–183. Kottelat, M., 1990. Indochinese nemacheilines, A revision of nemacheiline loaches (Pisces: Cypriniformes) of Thailand, Burma, Laos, Cambodia and southern Vietnam. Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, München: 262. Singh, A., Sen, N., Bănărescu, P. M. and T. T. Nalbant, 1982. New noemacheiline loaches from India (Pisces, Cobitidae). Travaux du Museum d'Histoire Naturelle“Grigore Antipa”, 23: 201–212. Vishwanath, W. and K. Shanta. 2004. A new fish species of the Indo-Burmese genus Badis Bleeker (Teleostei: Perciformes) from Manipur, India. Zoos’ Print Journal, 19 (9): 1619–1621.

11


COVER-DEPENDENCY OF ANURANS IN THE RIVERSTONE, KNUCKLES MOUNTAIN FOREST RANGE, SRI LANKA Sectional Editor: Enrique La Marca Submitted: 12 August 2011, Accepted: 02 April 2012

Senarathge R. Weerawardhena1,2 and Anthony P. Russell1 1 Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary 2500, University Drive NW, Calgary, T2N 1N4, Alberta, Canada; Email: [email protected] 2 Department of Zoology, University of Kelaniya, Kelaniya 11600, Sri Lanka; Email: [email protected] Abstract The species composition of anurans was studied in the disturbed and undisturbed sub-montane forest habitats in the Riverstone of the Knuckles Mountain Forest Range of Sri Lanka. Twenty one anuran species were encountered. The distribution pattern of collected anuran species was related to the percentage of vegetational cover and they were categorized in relation to dependency on the vegetational cover. Keywords: Abundance, leaf-litter, amphibians, ecology, conservation, Dumbara highlands. Introduction Generally, tea (Camellia sinensis) plantations require about 50% diffused sunlight for optimal physiological activity (Marby, 1972). Thus, the use of shade trees in tea plantations is an important component. In commercial tea plantations, partial shading is provided by growing tea plants beneath taller trees (i.e. shade trees--planted among tea plants at densities that are not overly competitive with tea plants). For example, canopies of tall (about 10m-15m) trees, such as Albizzia moluccana and Grevillea robusta, and medium (about 3m-5m) shrubs, such as Acacia auriculiformis, Erythrina lithosperma, and Gliricidia sepium, provide partial shade at different times of the day, depending on the direction of incident radiation in relation to tea plantations. The various species of shade trees in tea plantations create different conditions of shade

and litter accumulation that, in turn, affect forest regeneration (Zedler, 2007). Rates of litter accumulation vary substantially between different floral compositions and different climatic regions (Zedler, 2007). For example, leaf production in the shrub layer of the tropical forest varies nearly four-fold over the year, and nearly ten-fold in the high canopy layer (Rabenold & Bromer, 1989). The accumulations of fallen leaves, together with debris of the stages, form a litter-layer that covers the soil surface. Secondary forests are generally categorized as establishing high rates of litter fall relatively quickly, within the first 25 years of secondary succession (Brown & Lugo, 1990; Ramaksrishnan & Toky, 1983). Soon after, this plateaus in relation to the litter production rate of the forest (Ewel, 1976). Moreover, formed litter mass is likely to


COVER-DEPENDENCY OF ANURANS IN THE KNUCKLES – SRI LANKA


reflect development of biomass during secondary succession (Ewel, 1976). The presence of the litter layer can influence the moisture content of the soil surface (Zedler, 2007). Accumulations of litter around tree buttresses and moist spots often harbour many individual anurans, and depending on the moisture regime, anurans that live in forest litter are often highly concentrated (Scott, 1994). Therefore, they are abundant in the litter of tropical forests and the litter-layer could contribute substantially to anuran diversity in these habitats. Modifications of microclimatic conditions, both above and below ground, also have important influences on floral and faunal distributions and interactions with each other (Stinner & Stinner, 1989). The presence of macro- and microscopic-litter fauna is important as a foraging microhabitat because most of these species constitute prey items for litter-dwelling anurans (Dodd, 2010; Vitt & Caldwell, 2001). Moreover, abundance, activity, and feeding behavior of anurans are influenced by temporal variation in the amount and composition of litter, because the saprophagous macrofauna such as earthworms, grasshoppers, insect larvae, isopods and millipedes, processes large amounts of litter and has a tremendous impact on the soil and smaller litter fauna (Anderson, 1988; Hassall et al., 1987). Frequently encountered terrestrial anurans in the forest litter are bufonids, microhylids and rhacophorids, plus other anurans such as ranids that breed in aquatic habitats but spend most of their adult lives on the forest floor (Dodd, 2010). Some of these anurans, such as Pseudophilautus, are entirely terrestrial and depend on moist litter and cover for their direct developmental mode of reproduction (Dubois, 2004; Meegaskumbura & Manamendra-Arachchi, 2011; Pethiyagoda & Manamendra-Arachchi, 1998; Wells, 2007). Species that prefer open-canopy habitats may gradually be excluded from the close-canopy habitats as canopy cover increases (Wells, 2007). There are a number of reasons for this type of shift of distribution patterns of anurans in relation to the vegetational cover. For example, variances in vegetational cover are likely to be correlated with differences in abundance of prey and predators, light availability, relative humidity (Dietz & Steinlein, 2002) and moisture content. The main objective of our research was to study the dependency of anuran species on vegetational cover in tropical forest habitats. To do this, we selected

Sri Lanka as the location of our study because it is considered to be a global hotspot for amphibians (Bossuyt et al., 2004; Meegaskumbura et al., 2002) and provides a rich amphibian fauna (3.9 species per 1,000km2) on which to work. In particular, we selected the KMFR for our study because it is one of the richest regions in Sri Lanka in terms of endemism. Moreover, this region and its anuran fauna, have experienced different anthropogenic influences such as agrochemical application, deforestation, forest dieback, habitat fragmentation, gem mining, illegal and legal agricultural practices, and soil erosion (Amarasinghe & Karunarathna, 2010), and nowadays still supports areas of virgin forest along with disturbed habitats. We focused on the virgin sub-montane forest leaf-litter and arboreal (i.e. shrub and stem) anuran species (hereafter anurans) in Sri Lanka. We selected anurans because they are closely associated with vegetation, are not highly mobile across broad distances, and are environmentally sensitive animals (Alford & Richards, 1999; Collins & Crump, 2009; Collins & Storfer, 2003; Jepson & Ladle, 2010; Lannoo, 2005; Wells, 2007). Materials and Methods Study area: The KMFR is situated at 70 21' N 810 45' E in the Central Province of Sri Lanka and lies in the Intermediate Zone of Sri Lanka (Fig. 1). The KMFR is oriented at right angles to the two principal wind currents that bring rains (the South-west and North-east monsoons) to Sri Lanka and it acts as a climatic barrier. The temperature of the KMFR varies across the region, and the mean monthly temperature in the KMFR ranges, between 15°C-25°C. The wide range of climatic and landscape features exhibited by the KMFR has resulted in a variety of natural vegetation types, ranging from lowland semi-evergreen forests, to sub-montane forests to montane forests (de Rosario, 1958). In the KMFR, the virgin sub-montane forest represents a transitional biological belt between highlands and lowlands. Typical patches of the virgin sub-montane forest are found in Cobert’s Gap, Kelabokka, and Riverstone Estate. These lie between 600m-1,300m above sea level. Due to strong winds in the virgin sub-montane forest, trees are stunted, much branched and aerodynamically shaped. In relation to competition for light, three strata are present in the virgin sub-montane forest in the KMFR: the herb/shrub layer (2m): the sub canopy (5m): and the canopy (15m). Each layer has its own unique plant species (Bambaradeniya & Ekanayake, 2003).

WEERAWARDHENA & RUSSELL, 2012


Sampling sites: To assess dependency of anurans on vegetational cover in tropical forest habitats, we selected sampling sites in the KMFR on the basis of structural features of the vegetation that differed from one other. We broadly categorized vegetation in the study area into three successional stages: early (ES), middle (MS), and late (LS); each of these stages was represented by ten sampling sites. These served as proxies for time. Currently in production stages (CIP) (tea plantations) are considered as the control stages which exhibit maximum disturbance. The CIP at equivalent distances to the experimental stages selected, were used as a baseline to assess the impact of disturbance on anuran communities compared to

those of the virgin sub-montane forest (VF), because this type of forest is considered to be the climax stage. The experimental and reference stages for our study are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 2. Our sampling procedure covers what we postulate to be the composition of the anuran communities before disturbance, the composition of that community after deforestation and the establishment of tea plantations (CIP), and the composition of the anuran communities at three stages (ES, MS, and LS) along the continuum of secondary forest succession, from relatively recently after abandonment to fully established secondary forest structure.

Figure 1: Map depicting the location of the KMFR within Sri Lanka, and the location of the study site (rectangle) within the KMFR (inset). Figure 2: Sampling design for analysis of dynamics of recovery of abandoned tea plantations by anurans in the KMFR, Sri Lanka. The virgin sub-montane forest (VF) represents the “permanent” habitat type to which others are compared. For the succession stages (CIP, ES, MS, LS) the horizontal axis represents a time axis, and the vertical axis a distance axis (with reference to the VF)



Table 1: Sampling design for examination of anuran communities in the KMFR, Sri Lanka (n= no. of sampling sites, * = Sampling site number, see Fig. 2 for representation of sampling site distribution).

Vegetation type Distance from virgin sub-montane forest <10m 10-100m 100-500m

Tea plantations currently-inproduction (CIP): Dominated by tea plants, Few grasses and ferns

n = 10, Site designation

0-10* Acronym CIP10

--


61-70* Acronym CIP500

Early successional stage (ES): Dominated by herbs—chiefly grasses and surviving tea plants.


11-20* Acronym ES10

-- --

Middle succession stage (MS): Dominated by secondary shrubs that have eliminated pioneer herbs by shading, Fewer surviving tea plants.


21-30* Acronym MS10


41-50* Acronym MS100


51-60* Acronym MS500

Late succession stage (LS): Dominated by taller secondary trees with an established canopy. Forest dense. 1-2 vertical vegetation strata.


31-40* Acronym LS10

-- --

Virgin sub-montane forest (VF): Dense, multi-storey, dominated by woody trees.

n = 10, Site designation A-J*

Acronym VF Period of sampling: Most anurans are more active during wet seasons than during dry seasons, and they are more active during warm periods than during cold periods (Crump, 1994). Therefore, the sampling stages were surveyed during the peak of the wet and dry seasons to gain information about variation of presence and abundance of anurans in relation to seasonal environmental conditions. Accordingly, each stage was sampled five times from April 2008 to April 2009 (Table 2). Field work was conducted from 06:00-10:00 hours (day sampling), and from 18:00-22:00 hours (night sampling). These two periods are considered to be the daily-peak-activity periods of tropical anurans (Duellman & Lizana, 1994). Table 2: Sampling periodicity employed in this study (MSL, Monthly sampling; IM, Inter-monsoon; SWM, South-west monsoon; NEM, North-east monsoon)

Season Month Sampling season

First IM (March-April)

April (2008) MSL 1

SWM (May-September)

August (2008) MSL 2

Second IM (October- November)

November (2008) MSL 3

NEM (December- February)

February (2009) MSL 4

Third IM (March- April)

April (2009)

MSL 5 (Repeat of MSL 1)

Quadrat sampling method: Quadrat sampling is effective for census sampling of anurans, and for closed-canopy forests where species occur in high densities but are difficult to detect because of their secretive habits (Jaeger & Inger, 1994). We laid quadrats randomly (i.e. independent replicates to avoid pseudoreplication) and employed a 10m x 10m sized quadrads, sampling ten quadrats per stage per season (Table 2). Leaf-litter and arboreal anurans: Four field workers searched for anurans within all microhabitats (i.e., among leaf-litter and among vegetation, inside and under logs, in rock crevices, and under rocks) within each quadrat. One person on each side of the quadrat removed all litter from a 30cm broad strip along the outer perimeter of the quadrat to make it easier to spot an escaping animal (Jaeger & Inger, 1994). Each field worker removed the litter and ground cover from strips inside the quadrat parallel to the boundary twine, and the field-crew worked successive strips from the perimeter toward the centre until the entire area had been sampled. One field worker checked for anurans that were attempting to escape. Individual anurans were collected and identified to species level. To avoid recounting the same individual, release of collected anurans was delayed until the sampling of that quadrat was complete. After identification and cumulative counting, captured anurans were released at their original location of capture. All litter and rocks were replaced.

15



Vegetational characteristics: We measured seven structural characteristics of the vegetation to describe the vegetational characters for all quadrats at all sites. These were: percentage of litter cover (proportion of the surface covered by litter); litter depth in cm (using a meter ruler); percentage of crown cover including canopy and sub-canopy cover (proportion of the surface covered by the aerial parts of the vegetation); density of woody trees (number of woody trees per 100m2); girth at breast height of every tree (cm); and height of vegetation in m (using an inclinometer). Results and Discussion Our results reveal that the lowest percentage of litter cover and depth occurs in CIP10 and CIP500 whereas the highest percentage values of litter cover and depth occur were recorded for LS10 and VF (Fig. 3, 4). This is mainly due to human interference involved in pruning, weeding, burning of litter and cleaning (Marby, 1972) of CIP sites. Peterson & Drewa (2009) showed that higher levels of disturbance in agricultural fields leads to the elimination of litter cover. On the other hand, LS had a lower density of tea plants and a higher percentage of litter cover and depth than did ES and all MS stages (Fig. 3). This is because the amount of ground area covered by litter depends on the canopy cover (Zedler, 2007). Figure 3: Percentages of litter cover for all stages across the five seasons. Further, our results show that the areas with the lowest litter cover show the lowest abundance and species richness of anurans. Accumulation of litter increases litter cover, and this could lead to a higher abundance and species diversity of anurans as secondary succession proceeds. The main reason for such a relationship between anuran species and forest-litter is that terrestrial anurans are highly sensitive to the micro-environmental features associated with litter cover (Scott, 1994). We report

on our vegetational and micro- environmental findings elsewhere. Figure 4: Litter depth (cm) for all stages across the five seasons. During the course of this study, a total of 237 post-metamorphic anurans, representing 21 species arrayed among the families Bufonidae, Microhylidae, Nyctibatrachidae, Ranidae and Rhacophoridae were collected (Table 3). The relationship between the type of cover and anuran species in the KMFR is listed in Table 3 and it supports the view that most of the collected anurans were closely associated with a particular type of cover. In terms of cover, we broadly categorized encountered anuran species into three groups. They are cover-independent, canopy cover-dependent, and litter cover-dependent species. Cover-independent or open-canopy anuran species: This group of anuran species lives mostly in open canopy habitats, but does not live in undisturbed forest habitats or in virgin forest habitats. These anuran species are categorized as open canopy species because they do not depend on canopy or litter cover. An example of such an anuran species is Duttaphrynus melanostictus (Table 3). Open canopy species are habitat generalists and are diurnally active (de Silva, 2009). Canopy cover-dependent or closed-canopy anuran species: Canopy cover is a measure of the area covered by above-ground foliage and stems of plant species, when viewed from above. Greig-Smith, (1983) defined cover as “the proportion of ground occupied by a perpendicular projection on to it of the aerial parts of individuals of the species”. Therefore, this constitutes the sum of cover values of multiple species in layered vegetation and thus often totals more than 100%. Wells (2007) pointed out that canopy cover may have a strong influence on the composition of anuran species in tropical

16



communities, but this has not been studied comprehensively. We noted that several anuran species live in closed canopy habitats; accordingly, we categorized them as closed canopy species; examples of these are Pseudophilautus cavirostris; P. mooreorum; P. cf. ocularis and Hylarana temporalis (Table 3). The common feature of all of them is that they are habitat specialists and are restricted to a specific habitat. For example, Pseudophilautus cavirostris; P. mooreorum and P. cf. ocularis are restricted to closed canopy forests. Hylarana temporalis is also a closed canopy forest species and lives in streams that run through closed canopy forests. Two of the unidentified species of Pseudophilautus, (“red head” and “white eye”), were also collected from closed canopy forest habitats, but due to their low abundance, we are unable to categorize them as canopy cover-dependent species. Litter cover-dependent anuran species: The litter-layer of the forest floor relates to floral characteristics of the forest. For example, the amount of ground covered by litter depends on the shrub (Dietz & Steinlein, 2002) and canopy cover. Heatwole (1961) pointed out that soil moisture and soil temperature affect the processes of decay and mineralization of tropical forest floor litter. Further, he pointed out that the amount and form of organic materials present on the forest floor determine the suitability of the forest floor as a habitat for various types of organisms. The structure of forest litter varies according to the type of leaves or logs that form the litter. For example, litter composed of bent or curved leaves has a greater amount of space available to organisms than that composed of flat leaves (Heatwole, 1961). Moreover, use of the forest litter-layer as a microhabitat depends on the depth or thickness of the layer, the deeper ones providing more space for litter dwelling organisms. Litter cover-dependent anuran species rely on local conditions of litter accumulation and decay processes (Heatwole, 1961). Generally, litter degradation takes years to occur, and several factors slow down the process. In temperate situations, litter degradation takes about one to 20 years for leaves and needles and up to 100 years for wood, but the decay process is faster in tropical regions (Schulze et al., 2005). Degradation can be significantly reduced by various local factors, such as aerobic conditions, clay content and low pH (Schulze et al., 2005). Thin leaves probably decay

faster than those that are thicker and more heavily cutinized. Our study revealed that two species of litter cover dwelling anurans, Ramanella obscura and Pseudophilautus (“yellow dorsum”) (Table 3). We observed R. obscura in virgin forest habitats. It depends on forest litter cover for survival. Although Pseudophilautus (yellow dorsum) was collected among the litter, we are unable to comment on the litter cover dependency of this species, because only one individual was encountered during the field sampling. Table 3: The type of cover used by anuran species in the KMFR (OC, Live in open canopy; CC, Live in closed canopy; LC, Live under litter cover; X = Not dependent; √ = Dependent; √* = Strictly dependent on respective cover).

Anurans collected from the forest floor use forest litter, cavities under logs, and burrows where relative humidity is high as a result of the accumulation of litter (Zedler, 2007). Such habitat occupancy reduces rates of water loss from the bodies of litter-dwelling anuran species. Occasionally they emerge from their refugia when environmental conditions are favorable, such as at night. This type of adaptive behavioural mechanism

Family & Species OC CC LC

Bufonidae Duttaphrynus melanostictus √* X √

Microhylidae Kaloula taprobanica X X √

Ramanella obscura X X √* Nyctibatrachidae Lankanectes corrugatus √ √ X

Ranidae Hylarana temporalis X √* X

Rhacophoridae Pseudophilautus cavirostris X √* X

P. fergusonianus √ √ X P. fulvus √ √ X P. hoffmani X √ X P. macropus √ √ X P. mooreorum X √* X P. cf. ocularis X √* X P. sarasinorum √ √ X P. cf. silus √ √ X P. steineri √ √ √ P. stuarti X √ √ Pseudophilautus (red head) X √* X Pseudophilautus (white eye) X √* X Pseudophilautus (yellow dorsum) X X √* Polypedates cruciger √ √ X Taruga cf. eques √ √ X

17



is useful for avoidance of desiccation and plays an important role in allowing them to survive and thrive in such restricted and particular environmental conditions (Ghalambor et al., 2010; Shoemaker et al., 1992). Litter-dwelling species are habitat specialists that feed on tiny organisms such as ants, mites, and termites that are scarce in the diets of larger frogs (Wells, 2007). This is true litter-dwelling habitat specialists such as R. obscura. Conclusion Few anuran species are cover independent and live in open habitats, and most are cover-dependent as post-metamorphic individuals. Very few anuran species are entirely dependent on litter cover. The behavioral patterns of anuran species and the type of habitats in the KMFR may have contributed to their cover dependency. Acknowledgements We thank A. Sathurusinghe (Conservator of Forests, Forest Department - Sri Lanka) and S. R. B. Dissanayake (Deputy Director, Department of Wildlife Conservation - Sri Lanka) for granting us permission [permit: R&E/RES/2-3/UK (Forest Department), WL/3/2/1/7 (Department of Wildlife Conservation)] to work in the KMFR, and for their guidance in this research project. We also thank U. G. Nomantha, N. Weerasinghe and K. Amarasinghe for helping us with field work. This research was in part funded by four Graduate Research Scholarships from the Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary and ASG-IUCN/SSC grant to SRW, and a Natural Science & Engineering Research Council of Canada Discovery Grant, and a University of Calgary Short Term Research Grant to APR. Literature Cited Alford, R. A. and S. J. Richards, 1999. Global amphibian declines: A problem in applied ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 30: 133-165. Amarasinghe, A. A. T. and D. M. S. S. Karunarathna, 2010. Impacts on the amphibians at the Dumbara Highlands, Sri Lanka. Preceedings of the Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation (ATBC), Bali, Indonesia: 8-9. Anderson, J. M., 1988. Spatiotemporal effects of invertebrates on soil processes. Biological Fertilizer of Soil, 6: 216 - 227.

Bambaradeniya, C. N. B. and S. P. Ekanayake, 2003. A guide to the Biodiversity of Knuckles Forest Region. IUCN, Country Office, Colombo, Sri Lanka: 18. Bossuyt, F., M. Meegaskumbura, N. Beenaerts, D. J. Gower, R. Pethiyagoda, K. Roelants, A. Mannaert, M. Wilkinson, M. M. Bahir, K. Manamendra-Arachchi, K. P. Ng, C. J. Schneider, O. V. Oomm and M. C. Milinkovitch, 2004. Local endemism within the Western Ghats-Sri Lanka biodiversity hotspot. Science, 306: 479 - 481. Brown, S. and A. E. Lugo, 1990. Tropical secondary forests. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 6: 1 - 32. Collins, J. P. and M. L. Crump, 2009 Extinction in our times: Global amphibian decline, Oxford University Press Inc, New Yolk, 10016, USA: 304. Collins, J. P. and A. Storfer, 2003. Global amphibian declines: Sorting the hypothesis. Diversity and Distribution. Blackwell Publishing Limited, Oxford, United Kingdom. 9: 89 - 98. Crump, M. L., 1994. Climate and environment. In: Heyer, W. R., M. A. Donnelly, R. W. McDiarmid, L. Hayek, and M. S. Foster (Ed.). Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: Standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, USA, 42 - 46. de Rosario, R. A., 1958. The climate and vegetation of the Knuckles region of Ceylon. The Ceylon Forester (N. S), 3(3-4): 207 - 260. de Silva, A., 2009. Amphibians of Sri Lanka: A photographic guide to common frogs, toads and caecilians. Creative Printers and Designers, Kandy, Sri Lanka: 168. Dietz, H. and T. Steinlein, 2002. Plant cover: Ecological implications and methodical approaches. In: Ambasht. R. S., and N. K. Ambasht, (Ed.). Modern trends in applied terrestrial ecology. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New Yolk, 10013, USA: 184. Dubois, A., 2004. Development pathways, speciation and supra-specific taxonomy in amphibians: Why dose Sri Lanka has more amphibians? Alytes, 22 (1 & 2): 19 - 37. Dodd, Jr. C. K., 2010. Amphibian ecology and conservation; A handbook of technique. Oxford University Press, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom: 464. Duellman, W. E. and N. Lizana, 1994. Biology of a sit and wait predator: the Leptodactylids frog, Ceratophrys cornuta. Herpetologica, 50 (1): 51 - 64.

18



Ewel, J. J., 1976. Litter fall and leaf decomposition in a tropical forest succession in eastern Guatemala. Journal of Ecology, 64: 293 - 308. Ghalambor, C. K., L. M. Angeloni and S. P. Carroll, 2010. Behavior as phenotypic plasticity, In: Westneat, D. F, and C. W. Fox, (Ed.). Evolutionary Behavioral Ecology. Oxford University Press Inc, New Yolk, 10016, USA: 664. Greig-Smith, P., 1983. Quantitative Plant Ecology. Third Ed, Oxford, Blackwell Scientific Publication, Oxford, United Kingdom: 374. Hassall, M., J. G. Turner and M. R. W. Rands, 1987. Effects of terrestrial isopods on the decomposition of different woodland leaf litter. Oecologia, 72: 597 - 604. Heatwole, H., 1961. Analysis of the forest floor habitat with a structural classification of the litter or L layer. Ecological Monographs, 31: 267 - 283. Jaeger, R. G. and R. F. Inger, 1994. Quadrat sampling. In: Heyer, W. R., M. A. Donnelly, R. W. McDiarmid, L. Hayekand, and M. S. Foster, (Ed.). Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: Standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, USA, 97 - 102. Jepson, P. and R. Ladle, 2010. Conservation: A beginner’s guide. One-world Publications, Oxford, OX2 7AR, United Kingdom: Lannoo, M., 2005. Amphibian declines: The conservation status of United States species. University of California, California, USA: 1115. Marby, H., 1972. Tea in Ceylon: An attempt at a regional and temporal differentiation of the tea growing areas in Ceylon. Franz Steiner Verlar GMBH - Wiesbaden, Germany: 238. Meegaskumbura, M., F. Bossuyt, R. Pethiyagoda, K. Manamendra-Arachchi, M. M. Bahir, M. C. Milinkovitch and C. J. Schneider, 2002. Sri Lanka: An Amphibian hotspot. Science, 298: 379. Meegaskumbura, M. and K. Manamendra-Arachchi, 2011. Two new species of shrub frogs (Rhacophoridae; Pseudophilautus) from Sri Lanka. Zootaxa, 2747; 1 - 18. Pethiyagoda, R. and K. Manamendra-Arachchi, 1998. Evaluating Sri Lanka`s amphibian diversity. Occasional Papers of Wildlife Heritage Trust, 2: 1 - 12.

Peterson, S. M. and P. B. Drewa, 2009. Are vegetation–environmental relationships different between herbaceous and woody groundcover Plants in barrens with shallow soils? Ecoscience, 16 (2): 197 - 208. Rabenold, K. N. and W. R. Bromer, 1989. Plant communities as animal habitats: effects of primary resources on the distribution and abundance of animals. In: Abrahamson, W. G. (Ed.). Plant and animal interactions. 291 - 353. Ramaksrishnan, P. S. and O. Toky, 1983. Secondary succession following slash and burn agriculture in Northeastern India - 2, Nutrient Cycling. Journal of Ecology, 71: 747 - 758. Schulze, E. D., E. Brek and K. Műller-Hohenstein, 2005. Plant Ecology. Springer Berlin–Heidelberg, Germany: 700. Scott, Jr. N. J., 1994. Complete species inventories, In: Heyer, W. R., M. A. Donnelly, R. W. McDiarmid, L., Hayek, and M. S. Foster, (Ed.). Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: Standard methods for amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, USA, 76 - 84. Shoemaker, V. H., S. S. Hillman, S. D. Hillyard, D. C. Jackson, L. L. McClanahan, Jr, P. C. Withers and M. L. Wygoda, 1992. Exchange of water, ions, and respiratory gases in terrestrial amphibians. In: Feder, M. E., and W. W. Burggren (Ed.). Environmental Physiology of the Amphibians. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA, 125 - 150. Stinner, B. R. and D. H. Stinner, 1989. Plant–animal interactions in agricultural ecosystems, In: Abrahamson, W. G. (Ed.). Plant and animal interactions. 355 - 393. Vitt, L. J. and J. P. Caldwell, 2001. Resource utilization and guild structure of small vertebrates in the Amazon forest leaf litter. Journal of Zoology, 234: 463 - 476. Wells, K. D., 2007. The ecology and behavior of amphibians. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Chicago, USA: 1400. Zedler, P. H., 2007. Fire effects on grasslands. In: Johnson, E. A., and K. Miyanishi, (Ed.). Plant Distribution Ecology: the process and the response. Elsevier Inc, MA 01803, USA, 397 - 439.

19


REPTILE DIVERSITY IN BERALIYA MUKALANA PROPOSED FOREST RESERVE, GALLE DISTRICT, SRI LANKA Sectional Editor: John Rudge Submitted: 13 January 2012, Accepted: 02 March 2012

D. M. S. Suranjan Karunarathna1 and A. A. Thasun Amarasinghe2 1 Young Zoologists’ Association of Sri Lanka, Department of National Zoological Gardens, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka E-mail: [email protected] 2 Komunitas Konservasi Alam Tanah Timur, Jl. Kuricang 18 Gd.9 No.47, Ciputat 15412, Tangerang, Indonesia E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Beraliya Mukalana Proposed Forest Reserve (BMPFR) is a fragmented lowland rainforest patch in Galle District, Sri Lanka. During our two-year survey we recorded a total of 66 species of reptile (28 Lizards, 36 Snakes and 2 Tortoises), which represents 31.4 % of the total Sri Lankan reptile fauna. Thirty-five of the species are endemic to Sri Lanka. Of the recorded 66 species, 1 species is Critically Endangered, 3 are Endangered, 6 are Vulnerable, 14 are Near-threatened and 4 are Data-deficient. This important forest area is threatened by harmful anthropogenic activities such as illegal logging, use of chemicals and land-fill. Environmental conservationists are urged to focus attention on this Wet-zone forest. Key words: Endemics, species richness, threatened, ecology, conservation, wet-zone. Introduction Beraliya Mukalana Proposed Forest Reserve (BMPFR) is an important forest area in Galle District, in the south of Sri Lanka. It is controlled by the Department of Forest Conservation. To date the reptile fauna is unstudied but the results of our survey of the amphibians of the area have been previously published (Karunarathna et al., 2008). Our aim in this study was to focus attention on the reptile species richness and abundance of the area with a view to bringing the various threats these reptiles face to the attention of conservationists and relevant government and non-government organizations.

Study Area: The Beraliya Mukalana Proposed Forest Reserve (BMPFR) area belongs to Alpitiya and Niyagama secretariat divisions of Galle District in Sri Lanka (6º19'–6º20' N, 80º10'–80º11' E) (Somasekaran, 1988). The Beraliya Mukalana forest covers 4639 hectares and falls in the southwestern Wet- zone. The area has several small hills, Atuwagala Kanda being the highest at 162 m and the forest area is 400 feet above sea level (Karunarathna et al., 2008). The forest reserve receives the southwestern monsoon and annual rainfall is about 3660 mm. The average annual temperature is about 28 ºC (Peries, 2003). The

TAPROBANICA, ISSN 1800-427X. April, 2012. Vol. 04, No. 01: pp. 20-26, 1 pl. © Taprobanica Private Limited, Jl. Kuricang 18 Gd.9 No.47, Ciputat 15412, Tangerang, Indonesia.

REPTILE DIVERSITY IN BERALIYA MUKALANA - SRI LANKA


BMPFR vegetation can be categorized as lowland evergreen rainforest (Gunatillake & Gunatillake, 1990). The direct distance between the BMPFR and the Sinharaja forest is about ~25 km and the direct distance from the Kanneliya forest is ~ 50 km. The area supports a rich network of waterways which includes two waterfalls called “Andahelena Ella” and “Gerandi Ella” (Ella = fall). Among the number of small streams which start from the upper areas, Eliya Dola and Mada Dola (Dola = small stream) are the major tributaries that flow throughout the year. The study area (BMPFR) has a rich floristic diversity and its composition provides good evidence for identifying it as a primary rainforest (Ashton et al., 1997). Remnants of Dipterocarpus forest occur in valleys and on their lower slopes, with D. zeylanicus and D. hispidus present in almost pure stands. Secondary forest and scrub occur where the original forest cover has been removed by shifting cultivation and in other places the forest has been replaced by rubber and tea plantations (Karunarathna et al., 2008). Mesua, Doona and Shorea forest, the climax vegetation over most of the reserve, covers the middle and upper slopes of the hills. Garcinia hermonii followed by Xylopia championii invariably dominate the understorey tree stratum, a range of species dominate the subcanopy and Mesua nagassarium usually predominates in the canopy layer. Several invasive plant species such as Lantana camara (Family: Verbenaceae), Tridax procumbens (Family: Asteraceae) and Clidemia hirta (Family: Melastomataceae) have been observed in disturbed areas in the forest margins. There is a monastery (Diwankara-lena temple) and many small caves are also present. Footpaths are found in and around BMPFR. Materials and Methods A total of 28 days (~10 hrs per day) were spent on fieldwork during the two year study period from February 2004 to January 2006. Normally we used visual encounter survey methods but additionally general area surveys, line transects (100m × 2m) and quadrate sampling methods (10m × 10m) were used. Different habitat types (home gardens, scrub jungles, paddy fields, rocky lands, near streams and natural forest) within the BMPFR were all surveyed. Surveys were conducted both day and night and torches (head-lamps) were used at night. All microhabitats such as water bodies, under rocks, logs and decaying vegetation, and trees and bushes up to 8 m, were thoroughly searched for the

presence of reptiles. All captured specimens were examined carefully and recorded before being released at their capture site without injury. No specimens were collected, transported or deposited. Road kills and data on animals killed by villagers were also used as additional sources of information. The species were identified in the field using diagnostic keys given by Deraniyagala (1953, 1955), Das & de Silva (2005), De Silva (1980), Greer (1991), Whitaker & Captain (2004) and Wickramasinghe & Somaweera (2003). After the survey period some specimens were confirmed to species level using Bauer et al. (2010), Batuwita & Bahir (2005), Batuwita & Pethiyagoda (2007), Maduwage et al. (2009), Manamendra-Arachchi et al. (2007), Praschag et al. (2011), Rooijen & Vogel (2009), Somaweera (2006), Somaweera & Somaweeera (2009), Vogel & David (2006), Vogel & Rooijen (2011) and Wickramasinghe et al. (2007). Basic environmental parameters were recorded for locations where specimens were collected. Threat criteria is given according to IUCNSL & MENR (2007). Results and Discussion During the present two-year survey we were able to record a total of 66 species (Table 1) of reptile representing 36 (n=221) species of serpentoid reptiles and 30 (n=672) species of tetrapod reptiles. These belong to 14 families and 42 genera and include 35 (n=456) (including unidentified species) endemic reptile species. The endemic and relict genera of snakes (Aspidura, Balanophis and Cercaspis) and of tetrapod reptiles (Lyriocephalus, Ceratophora, Lankascincus and Nessia) were found in BMPFR. Five unidentified species, all of which might be new to science, belonging to the genera Cnemaspis, Ramphotyphlops, Typhlops and Xenochrophis were also recorded during the survey. According to IUCN-SL and MENR-SL (2007) criteria 1 (n=3) Critically Endangered, 3 (n=7) Endangered, 6 (n=42) Vulnerable, 14 (n=168) Near Threatened and 4 (n=23) Data deficient species were recorded. These records show that at least 31.4% of Sri Lanka’s extant reptiles are present in the BMPFR. There is also a significant representation of the country’s endemic amphibian species (see Karunarathna et al., 2008). Species such as Ahaetulla pulverulenta, Boiga barnesii, B. forsteni, Chrysopelea ornata, Dendrelaphis schokari, Lycodon striatus, Oligodon calamarius, Balanophis ceylonensis, Bungarus ceylonicus, Rhinophis

KARUNARATHNA & AMARASINGHE, 2012


tricoloratus, Ceratophora aspera, Cnemaspis molligodai, Cyrtodactylus cracens, Hemiphyllodatylus typus, Lepidodactylus lugubris, Europis madaraszi and Lankascincus dorsicatenatus were all recorded for the first time in BMPFR. One species of gecko (Cyrtodactylus cracens) and one species of Shield-tail snake (Rhinophis tricoloratus) previously only known from the Sinharaja World Heritage site are now also recorded from BMPFR. More than 40 % of the reptile species were recorded from within the well wooded home gardens that are dominated with native plant species. The family with the largest number of species is Colubridae (19 sp.), followed by Gekkonidae (12 sp.), Scincidae (8 sp.), Agamidae and Natricidae (6 sp. each), Viperidae (4 sp.), Elapidae, Typhlophidae and Varanidae (2 sp. each) and Bataguridae, Cylindrophidae, Pythonidae, Trionychidae and Uropeltidae (1 sp. each). We believe the high diversity seen in this Wet-zone forest habitat is mainly due to the isolation of this forest and the availability of a number of microhabitats, including man-modified habitats that are favorable to reptiles. The leading number of endemic species (including unidentified species) is in Colubridae and Gekkonidae (7 sp. each), Scincidae (6 sp.), Agamidae and Natricidae (4 sp. each), Viperidae (2 sp.), Cylindrophidae, Elapidae, Trionychidae, Typhlophidae and Uropeltidae (1 sp. each) respectively. In BMPFR the genus Lankascincus (fossorial skinks) are commonly found and 4 out of the 10 species recorded from Sri Lanka occur. The agamid lizard, Otocryptis wiegmanni is a ground dwelling lizard that is only distributed in shady places near streams or wet areas in the BMPFR. We were able to observe some egg-laying behaviour for this species. Normally they laid 3 to 6 eggs at a single time after digging holes in sandy soil. During one night trip we observed a group (3 to 7 individuals) of the snake Cercaspis carinatus digging the soil (20 mm to 50 mm deep) and feeding on the eggs of O. wiegmanni. This shows that C. carinatus can behave as a group during feeding and also that the eggs of O. wiegmanni may be a favoured meal. When considering the 66 species by their primary mode of living there are 29 (43.9%) terrestrial, 25 (37.9%) arboreal, 6 (9.1%) aquatic and 6 (9.1%) fossorial species. The leading number of terrestrial species is in Colubridae (10 sp.), Scincidae (7 sp.), Viperidae (3 sp.) and Agamidae, Elapidae and Natricidae (2 sp. each). The leading number of

arboreal species is in Gekkonidae (11 sp.), followed by Colubridae (9 sp.), Agamidae (4 sp.) and Viperidae (1 sp.) respectively. The most uncommon tetrapod reptile species are Lepidodactylus lugubris (n=1), followed by Geckoella triedrus and Hemiphyllodatylus typus (n=2 each); the most uncommon snakes are Ahaetulla pulverulenta and Typhlops cf. lankaensis (n=1 each), followed by Amphiesma stolata, Balanophis ceylonensis, Boiga forsteni, Dendrelaphis bifrenalis, Lycodon striatus and Python molurus (n=2 each). Snakes were well represented in home gardens with some species hiding in the shaded and cool roofs of some village houses. At night time all snakes moved from the houses to the forest areas to forage. Most of the fossorial and semi-fossorial species of snake were recorded after the rainy season, particularly in the well-shaded canopy covered areas. Among serpentoid reptiles Aheatulla nasuta, Cercaspis carinatus, Hypnale hypnale, Lycodon aulicus, Ptyas mucosa and Xenocrophis cf. piscator are the most common and widespread species. In terms of tetrapod reptiles Calotes calotes, C. versicolor, Cnemaspis molligodai, C. silvula, Eutropis carinata, E. macularia, Gehyra mutilata, Hemidactylus parvimaculatus, H. frenatus, Lankascincus fallax, L. gansi, L. greeri and Otocryptis wiegmanni were the most common and widespread. In terms of the species abundance in each habitat type, the highest species abundance occurred in Natural forests 30.6 % (n=273), followed by Home gardens 26.4 % (n=236), Near streams 17.8 % (n=159), Rocky land areas 12.2 % (n=109) and the lowest species abundance occurred in Paddy fields 7.1 % (n=63) and Scrub jungles 5.9 % (n=53). The high species abundance in the Natural forest habitat may be due to the high amount of leaf litter, shaded forest patches, micro-habitats (e.g., tree holes, caves, tree bark, rock boulders, crevices, water holes, decaying logs, loose soil, and other small niches), favorable climatic conditions and also the abundant availability of food resources such as small vertebrates and invertebrates (e.g. frogs, geckos, skinks, lizards, small mammals, small birds, animal eggs, earthworms, ground insects etc.) on which to feed. The highest number of endemic species was found in Natural forest (29) followed by Near streams (24), Rocky land areas (15) and Home gardens (12). Scrub jungles (7) and Paddy fields (5) showed the lowest number of endemic species.



Threats and conservation concern Several areas of the Beraliya Forest have been cleared for tea and rubber cultivation. Other areas have been adversely impacted by illegal logging. Every day the disturbances in this forest are increasing with many local visitors coming on picnics or trips. These people sometimes leave glass bottles, polythene bags and other assorted rubbish inside the forest. Many streams and watercourses in the forest have become contaminated with broken glass, polythene, clothes, garbage and soap. This forest area is also a base for local illegal alcohol producers. They utilise many streams to produce their alcohol and discard all the remaining poisonous residues of their products into the streams. These streams are also contaminated with the many pesticides and chemicals used for agriculture practices like paddy cultivation. Riverside vegetation has been cut back around the communities and invasive species have replaced natural habitats. Many wet areas have been in-filled by the local people who have made many small road networks and because of this many habitats used by tadpoles have been destroyed. Due to mythical beliefs many people kill all the snakes they meet. In addition the villagers kill land monitors and other mammals for meat and water monitors for oil. Many of the boundary markers for the forest erected by the Forestry Department have been removed and inside the forest we have observed domestic cats and dogs chasing wild animals. Road kills are another major threat around this forest patch due to its high fragmentation. Even though this forest patch is controlled by the Department of Forestry we have never seen any of their officials in or around the forest. There is a monastery inside the forest and the only pristine forest patch remaining survives around the monastery. Acknowledgements The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to N. Karunarathna, T. Abewardena, A. Kumarasinghe, P. Silva, T. Peries, C. Soysa, R. Sirimanna, D. Jayamanna, M. Madawala and A. Udayakumara from the YZA for their help in fieldwork. Also Mendis Wickramasinghe (HFS), Kelum Manamendra-Arachchi (WHT) and an anonymous reviewer for valuable comments. Dushantha Kandambi is acknowledged for photographs and thanks are due to many villagers for providing accommodation. Finally, the first author thanks the Department of Forestry and the

Department of Wildlife Conservation of Sri Lanka for permissions (FRC/7 & WL/3/2/1/4/10) to undertake field work. Literature Cited Ashton, M., C. V. S Gunatileke, N. De Zoysa, M. D. Dassanayake, N. Gunatileke and S. Wijesundara, 1997. A field guide to the common trees and shrubs of Sri Lanka. Wildlife Heritage Trust of Sri Lanka: 455. Batuwita, S. and M. M. Bahir, 2005. Description of five new species of Cyrtodactylus (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) from Sri Lanka. In: Yeo, D. C. J., P. K. L. Ng and R. Pethiyagoda (eds.). Contributions to biodiversity exploration and research in Sri Lanka. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology, Supplement No. 12: 351-380. Batuwita, S. and R. Pethiyagoda, 2007. Description of a new species of Sri Lankan litter skink (Squamata: Scincidae: Lankascincus). Ceylon Journal of Science (Biological Science), 36 (2): 80-87. Bauer, A., T. R. Jackman, E. Greenbaum, A. de Silva, V. B. Giri and I. Das, 2010. Molecular evidence for the taxonomic status of Hemidactylus brookii group taxa (Squamata: Gekkonidae). Herpetological Journal, 20: 129–138. Das, I. and A. de Silva, 2005. Photographic guide to the Snakes and other Reptiles of Sri Lanka. New Holland Publishers: 144. Deraniyagala, P. E. P., 1953. A Colored Atlas of some vertebrates from Ceylon, Tetrapod Reptilia. National Museums of Sri Lanka, Colombo, Vol. 02: 101. Deraniyagala, P. E. P., 1955. A Colored Atlas of Some Vertebrates from Ceylon, Serpentoid Reptilia. National Museums of Sri Lanka, Colombo, Vol. 03: 121. De Silva, P. H. D. H., 1980. Snake Fauna of Sri Lanka, with special reference to skull, dentition and venom in snakes. National Museums of Sri Lanka, Colombo: 480. Greer, A. E., 1991. Lankascincus, a new genus of Scincid lizards from Sri Lanka with descriptions of three new species. Journal of Herpetology, 25 (1): 59-64. Gunatilleke, I. A. U. N. and C. V. S. Gunatilleke, 1990. Distribution of Floristic Richness and its Conservation in Sri Lanka. Conservation Biology, 4 (1): 21-31. IUCNSL and MENR, 2007. The 2007 Red List of Threatened Fauna and Flora of Sri Lanka. Colombo, IUCN Sri Lanka: 148.

23



Karunarathna, D. M. S. S., U. T. I. Abeywardena, A. A. T. Amarasinghe, D. G. R. Sirimanna and M. D. C. Asela, 2008. Amphibian faunal diversity of Beraliya Mukalana Proposed Forest Reserve. Tigerpaper, 35 (2): 12-16. Maduwage, K., A. Silva, K. Manamendra-Arachchi and R. Pethiyagoda, 2009. A taxonomic revision of the South Asian hump-nosed pit vipers (Squamata: Viperidae: Hypnale). Zootaxa, 2232: 1–28. Manamendra-Arachchi, K., S. Batuwita and R. Pethiyagoda, 2007. A taxonomical revision of the Sri Lankan day-geckos (Reptilia: Gekkonidae: Cnemaspis), with description of new species from Sri Lanka and India. Zeylanica, 7 (1): 9-122. Peries, H. T. A. P., 2003. The Beraliya Mukalana Forest in Galle district. Report of the Young Zoologists’ Association of Sri Lanka: 14. Praschag, P., H. Stuckas, M. Packert, J. Maran and U. Fritz, 2011. Mitochondrial DNA sequences suggest a revised taxonomy of Asian flapshell turtles (Lissemys SMITH, 1931) and the validity of previously unrecognized taxa (Testudines: Trionychidae). Vertebrate Zoology, 61 (1): 147-160. Rooijen, J. V. and G. Vogel, 2009. A multivariate investigation into the population systematics of Dendrelaphis tristis (Daudin, 1803) and Dendrelaphis schokari (Kuhl, 1820): revalidation of Dendrophis chairecacos Boie, 1827 (Serpentes: Colubridae). Herpetological Journal, 19: 193-200.

Somasekaran, T., 1988. The National Atlas of Sri Lanka: Surveys Department Sri Lanka: 152. Somaweera, R. 2006. Snakes of Sri Lanka (Sinhala text). Wildlife Heritage Trust of Sri Lanka: 297. Somaweera, R. and N. Somaweera, 2009. Lizards of Sri Lanka: A colour guide with field keys. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt am Main, Germany: 303. Vogel, G. and P. David, 2006. On the taxonomy of the Xenochrophis piscator complex (Serpentes, Natricidae), In: Herpetologia Bonnensis II: Proceedings of the 13th Congress of the Societas Europaea Herpetologica, Vences, M., J. Köhler, T. Ziegler & W. Böhme (eds.): 241-246. Vogel, G, and J. V. Rooijen, 2011. A new species of Dendrelaphis (Serpentes: Colubridae) from the Western Ghats – India. Taprobanica, 3 (2): 77-86. Wickramasinghe, L. J. M., R. Rodrigo, N. Dayawansa and U. L. D. Jayantha, 2007. Two new species of Lankascincus (Squamata: Scincidae) from Sripada Sanctuary (Peak Wilderness), in Sri Lanka. Zootaxa, 1612: 1-24. Wickramasinghe, L. J. M. and R. K. Somaweera, 2003. Distribution and Current Status of the Endemic Geckos of Sri Lanka. Gekko, 3 (1): 2–13. Whitaker, R. and A. Captain, 2004. Snakes of India: The field guide. Draco Publication Limited. India: 486.

Table 1: Reptiles checklist of the BMPFR (Abbreviation: E, Endemic species; CR, Critically endangered; EN, Endangered; VU, Vulnerable; NT, Near threatened; DD, Data deficient; TOC, Total Individual count and REA, relative abundance). Scientific name and families Common name and status TOC REA %

Family Pythonidae 1 Python molurus Indian python 2 0.22 Family Colubridae 2 Ahaetulla nasuta Green vine Snake 16 1.79 3 Ahaetulla pulverulenta Brown vine Snake NT 1 0.11 4 Boiga barnesii Barnes’s cat Snake E / NT 3 0.34 5 Boiga ceylonensis Sri Lankan cat Snake 3 0.34 6 Boiga forsteni Forsten’s cat Snake 2 0.22 7 Cercaspis carinatus Sri Lanka wolf Snake E / VU 21 2.35 8 Chrysopelea ornata Ornate flying Snake NT 3 0.34 9 Coelognathus helena Trinket Snake 4 0.45

24



Scientific name and families Common name and status TOC REA %

10 Dendrelaphis caudolineolatus Gunther's bronze Back VU 4 0.45 11 Dendrelaphis bifrenalis Boulenger’s bronze Back E 2 0.22 12 Dendrelaphis schokari Common bronze Back E 9 1.01 13 Lycodon aulicus Common wolf Snake 10 1.12 14 Lycodon osmanhilli Flowery wolf Snake E 5 0.56 15 Lycodon striatus Barred wolf Snake 2 0.22 16 Oligodon arnensis Common kukri Snake 8 0.90 17 Oligodon sublineatus Dumeril’s kukri Snake E 4 0.45 18 Oligodon calamarius Templeton’s kukri Snake E / VU 3 0.34 19 Ptyas mucosa Common rat Snake 17 1.90 20 Sibynophis subpunctatus Jordan’s Poligodont 6 0.67 Family Cylindrophidae 21 Cylindrophis maculatus Sri Lanka pipe Snake E / NT 5 0.56 Family Natricidae 22 Amphiesma stolatum Buff striped Keelback 2 0.22 23 Aspidura guentheri Ferguson's Roughside E / NT 4 0.45 24 Atretium schistosum Olive Keelback 6 0.67 25 Balanophis ceylonensis Blossom Krait E / VU 2 0.22 26 Xenochrophis asperrimus Sri Lanka Checkered Keelback E 11 1.23 27 Xenochrophis cf. piscator Common checkered Keelback E 16 1.79 Family Elapidae 28 Bungarus ceylonicus Ceylon Krait E / NT 3 0.34 29 Naja naja Common Cobra 5 0.56 Family Typhlophidae 30 Ramphotyphlops cf. braminus Blind Snake sp. DD 7 0.78 31 Typhlops cf. lankaensis Blind Snake sp. E / DD 1 0.11

Family Uropeltidae 32 Rhinophis tricoloratus Deraniyagala’s Shieldtail E / DD 4 0.45

Family Viperidae 33 Daboia russelii Russell’s Viper 3 0.34 34 Hypnale hypnale Merrem’s hump-nosed Viper 16 1.79 35 Hypnale zara Lowland hump-nosed Viper E 7 0.78 36 Trimeresurus trigonocephalus Green pit Viper E 4 0.45 Family Bataguridae 37 Melanochelys trijuga Black Turtle NT 15 1.68 Family Trionychidae 38 Lissemys ceylonensis Soft shell Turtle E / VU 8 0.90 Family Agamidae 39 Calotes calotes Green garden Lizard 18 2.02 40 Calotes liolepis Whistling Lizard E / VU 4 0.45 41 Calotes versicolor Common garden Lizard 25 2.80 42 Ceratophora aspera Rough horn Lizard E / EN 4 0.45 43 Lyriocephalus scutatus Lyre head Lizard E / NT 4 0.45 44 Otocryptis wiegmanni Sri Lankan kangaroo Lizard E / NT 28 3.14

25



Scientific name and families Common name and status TOC REA %

Family Gekkonidae 45 Cnemaspis molligodai Molligoda's day gecko E / NT 49 5.49 46 Cnemaspis silvula Forest day gecko E 32 3.58 47 Cnemaspis cf. silvula Day gecko sp. E? 44 4.93 48 Cnemaspis cf. tropidogaster Day gecko sp. E? 36 4.03 49 Cyrtodactylus cracens Narrow headed forest Gecko E / CR 3 0.34 50 Geckoella triedrus Spotted bowfinger Gecko E / NT 2 0.22 51 Gehyra mutilata Four claw Gecko 46 5.15 52 Hemidactylus parvimaculatus Spotted house Gecko 59 6.61 53 Hemidactylus depressus Kandyan Gecko E 14 1.57 54 Hemidactylus frenatus Common house Gecko 29 3.25 55 Hemiphyllodactylus typus Slender Gecko EN 2 0.22 56 Lepidodactylus lugubris Scaly finger Gecko EN 1 0.11 Family Scincidae 57 Eutropis carinata Common Skink 48 5.38 58 Europis macularia Bronze green little Skink 58 6.49 59 Europis madaraszi Spotted Skink E / NT 16 1.79 60 Lankascincus fallax Common lanka Skink E 37 4.14 61 Lankascincus dorsicatenatus Catenated lanka Skink E / DD 11 1.23 62 Lankascincus gansi Gans's lanka Skink E / NT 26 2.91 63 Lankascincus greeri Greer's lanka Skink E 30 3.36 64 Nessia burtonii Three toe snake Skink E / NT 4 0.45 Family Varanidae 65 Varanus bengalensis Land Monitor 11 1.23 66 Varanus salvator Water Monitor 8 0.90

26

TAPROBANICA VOL. 04: NO. 01

Plate 01 Fig. 1: Boiga forsteni Fig. 2: Lycodon osmanhilli Fig. 3: Oligodon sublineatus Fig. 4: Trimeresurus trigonocephalus Fig 5: Ceratophora aspera Fig. 6: Otocryptis wiegmanni Fig. 7: Cnemaspis silvula Fig. 8: Lankascincus fallax


A REVIEW OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF BATS IN SOUTHWESTERN REGION OF DECCAN, MAHARASHTRA - INDIA AND CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS Sectional Editor: Colin Chapman Submitted: 06 September 2011, Accepted: 23 May 2012

Mahesh C. Gaikwad1, Sujit S. Narwade2, Kamlakar M. Fartade3 and Vishakha S. Korad4

1 Nimblak, Faltan, District Satara, Maharashtra, India 2 Utkarsh Nagar, Vijapur road, Solapur, India; E-mail: [email protected] 3 At post Satwaiwadi, Tal-Vashi, District Osmanabad, Maharashtra, India 4 Department of Zoology, Fergusson College, Pune, Maharashtra, India Abstract In present survey carried out in the South-West region of Maharashtra, India, 11 bat species were reported from the study area. The area comprised four districts of Maharashtra namely Pune, Satara, Solapur and Osmanabad. It was also found that all the bat species mentioned in this paper are much more widely distributed than was previously recorded and populations occur in areas for which only single or scattered records were previously available. Conversion of habitats of bats for various purposes by humans was found as one of the important threats to bats in region. Keywords: Chiroptera, fruit bat, leaf-nosed bat, false vampire, flying fox, Pipistrelle, ecology. Introduction Bats form some of the largest non-human aggregations of mammals, and may be among the most abundant groups of mammals when measured in numbers of individuals. Among the mammals of the world, bats comprise 25% (Mickleburgh et al., 2002). The Megachiroptera includes fruit bats and flying foxes of the tropical forests (Hill & Smith, 1984), Megachiropterans have a claw on the second finger of the wing. They have longer muzzles than micro-chiropterans and, while a few species can navigate by echolocation, fruit bats generally navigate by sight and have large, light-sensitive eyes. Most fruit bats are helpless in total darkness but can see very well in dim light. About 97 species

of Microchiropteran bats found in India are insectivorous. They are important components of forest as well as agricultural ecosystems. They consume insects in large volumes up to 100% of their body weight per night (Davison & Zubaid, 1992; Eckrich & Neuweiler, 1988; Kunz, 1982; Rainey & Pierson, 1992). The bat fauna has been well studied in the Western Ghats and parts of Marathwada (especially Aurangabad and Nanded districts) region of Maharashtra (Brosset, 1962a,b,c,d; Gaikwad, 2007; Korad & Gaikwad, 2006; Korad et al., 2007; Wroughton, 1912; 1913a,b,c, 1916a,b,c). Most of

TAPROBANICA, ISSN 1800-427X. April, 2012. Vol. 04, No. 01: pp. 27-36, 1 pl. © Taprobanica Private Limited, Jl. Kuricang 18 Gd.9 No.47, Ciputat 15412, Tangerang, Indonesia.

BATS IN MAHARASHTRA - INDIA


the reports published in the early 20th century are restricted to bat species reported along with other mammals of the region. Nevertheless, information for many species was based only on museum or literature references, with very little information on population or distribution patterns (Molur et al., 2002). Our main objective was to understand the distribution of bat species in South-West Maharashtra. Materials and Methods Study area: The study area, the Deccan region of South-West Maharashtra, India includes semi arid forest, open scrublands, and southern tropical thorn forest (Champion & Seth 1968). It lies at an average of 600 m above sea level and receives low rainfall, with about 600 mm annual precipitation. Our surveys covered the majority of the areas from four districts, namely Solapur, Osmanabad and parts of Pune and Satara districts of Maharashtra (Plate 2). Data collection: Five hundred specimens were collected during a previous project ‘Assessment of bat diversity in the Central Western Ghats of Maharashtra’, funded by Ministry of Environment and Forests at Fergusson college, Pune, India, during 2002-05. These specimens were used as reference material for identification of the bat species during the present study. Measurements were taken for the opportunistically found dead, injured or rescued bats over the study period. First survey in study area was carried out in summer 2004 and subsequent study was undertaken in 2008. Selected areas were revisited in June 2011, when bats were typically found in large colonies, avoiding winter hibernation and the breeding season. Identification of the bat roosts in study area was also based on the information collected from local people and field visits were arranged accordingly. Initial site assessment was done at less disturbed areas by humans and also at other potential bat areas, such as large trees, temples, forts, and old buildings. Bat signs such as droppings, urine stains along with cracks, holes and crevices were also observed. The population of small bat colonies was recorded by direct count (Swift, 1980). Large colonies were visited at the time of emergence of bats and counting was done by snap shot method (observing bats at a particular moment) and noting down the time period required by the bats for leaving the roosting site (Hallam et al., 2010). In the majority of the cases the bats were found in crevices at least 5 m above the ground, on roofs and walls. Most

were identifiable at some distance. It was known that colonies of other cliff crevice dwelling vertebrates such as white-throated swift, Aeronautes saxatalis were found in vicinity to bat colonies (Pierson & Rainey, 1998). House swifts Apus affinis are also known to inhabit old buildings, temples, forts, etc. in India. Therefore, based on earlier experience we refined our survey method and selected comparatively undisturbed areas, where house swifts Apus affinis can easily been observed flying. We got good results and could find out more than 30% of our bat roosts with help of this method. Bat identification follows Srinivasulu et al. (2010) and Bates & Harrison (1997). Results Species specific information about earlier records (Bates & Harrison, 1997, Molur et al., 2002) has been given along with a map to highlight the previously reported sites of the bats in Maharashtra, relative to the results of the present study. Mapping of the colony sites was done for understanding distribution of bats in the study area. Identification keys such as dental formula of the bat species which are difficult to identify without measurements have been provided for selected cases.

Fulvous Fruit Bat (Fig. 1) Rousettus leschenaultii

This species is a medium sized bat and can be recognized by its large claw on first digit and a smaller one on the second, a short tail and rostrum of the skull moderately elongated. The muzzle is heavy and has deep emargination between projecting nostrils. The 2nd phalanx of the 3rd metacarpal is smaller than in R. aegyptiacus. This bat was observed in large, underground water tunnels of more than one 500 m length. Colonies of more than 15,000 was observed at Naldurga and Paranda forts while alongside roads at Nimblak, Mangalwedha and Kegaon their population was found to be between 5000 and 10000 individuals. We found that the population of this bat species was associated with the age of tunnel, which means recently developed tunnel holds comparatively fewer individuals. Locations: Nimblak-Phaltan; Mangalvedha; Kegaon road; Naldurga Fort; Paranda Fort. Previous records from Maharashtra: Ghatmatha (Wroughton, 1916b); Jogeshwari; Kanehri; Elephanta; Alibag; Khopoli; Khandala; Ratnagiri; Aurangabad; Chikaldara (Brosset, 1962a); Mulshi; Mahabaleshwar; Wai, Satara; Bhor, Pune; Shivneri

GAIKWAD ET AL., 2012


Fort, Junnar; Malshej Waterfall, Lonavala (Gaikwad, 2007). Figure 1: Rousettus leschenaultii

Indian Flying Fox (Fig. 2)

Pteropus giganteus This species is a medium to large sized fruit bat without a tail. The patagium arises from sides of the dorsum and back of the 2nd toe. Its ventral surface was pale tan to deep orange or chestnut brown. It is one of the common species in Maharashtra, but its roosting areas were not previously recorded from the study area. During our study we observed 16 colonies of P. giganteus, numbering between 100 and 500 individuals. Bat colonies were found roosting large old trees such as figs (Ficus sp.), mango (Mangifera indica) and tamarind (Tamarindus indica). Flying foxes were observed dispersing several kilometres from their roosting site for foraging. Figure 2: Pteropus giganteus

Locations: Natepute; Akluj; Malinagar; Maloli; Bhalvani, Pandharpur; Rambaug, Pandharpur; Tembhurni; Karmala; Barshi; Pangaon; Solapur city; Kati; Sindfal; Kini; Jagji; Mangalvedha. Previous records from Maharashtra: Rajwadi, Patan; Pili Sipna Valley (Wroughton, 1912); Panshet backwater, Pune (Wroughton & Davidson, 1920a); Mumbai, Malad; Kalyan; Thane, Belapur; Ahmednagar (McCann, 1934); Near Umbraj, Satara; Nagpur; Amraoti (Moghe, 1951); Chanda; Pune (Korad & Yardi, 1998-2001).

Short-nosed Fruit bat (Fig. 3) Cynopterus sphinx

This species is a small sized fruit bat with a short tail (half enclosed within the interfemoral membrane). Both the first and second fingers have distinct claws. Cynopterus sphinx has larger ears with paler anterior and posterior borders than its close relative C. brachyotis. This bat species was recorded from all over the study area and observed roosting at day time in groups of 4-20, mainly on trees like Ashoka (Polyalthia longifolia). In the late evening, bats were found in greater numbers, foraging on nearby fruiting trees. In some areas these bats were found dead on metal fences of vineyards. Figure 3: Cynopterus sphinx Locations: Supe; Patas; Daund; Nimblak; Baramati; Natepute; Indapur; Karmala; Nira Narsingpur; Malshiras; Malinagar; Tembhurni; Maloli; Bhalavani, Pandharpur; Mangalvedha;



Solapur; Kati; Pangaon; Barshi; Kini; Jagji; Osmanabad. Previous records from Maharashtra: Bandra-Mumbai; Nashik; Chanda (Wroughton, 1913a); Pune (Wroughton & Davidson, 1920a); Nagpur (Das & Sinha, 1971; Korad & Yardi, 1998-2001); Junnar; Bhor; Purandar; Saswad; Mulshi; Malshej (Gaikwad, 2007); Lonar (Joshi, In Molur et al., 2002).

Greater Mouse-tailed Bat (Fig. 4) Rhinopoma microphyllum

This bat species can easily be recognized by a tail that is generally shorter than the forearm. The face, ears and connecting membrane on the forehead are all without fur; the chin is also largely devoid of hair. Dermal ridge is poorly developed and condylocanine length (CCL) and mandibular toothrow (CM3) are longer and nasal inflations are smaller than other Rhinopoma species. Colonies of 50-100 bats were found at Naldurga Fort and an old temple in Apsinga village of Osmanabad district. Locations: Apsinga, Tuljapur; Naldurga Fort. Previous records from Maharashtra: Bombay (Hill, 1976); Nagpur (Sinha, 1970); Osmanabad; Songir, Bhamer (BMNH)

Figure 4: Rhinopoma microphyllum

Long-winged Tomb bat (Fig. 5)

Taphozous longimanus This species is a small medium sized sheath-tailed bat, with a semicircular gular sac on the throat. Each ear has a tragus with a club-shaped extremity.

The wing is attached to the ankle, and the abdomen is hairy. The tail is enclosed in an interfemoral membrane and the tail tip projects from the upper surface of the membrane at about the midpoint. The wings are long and narrow, and the second digit has no phalanges. The forearm length (FA) is about 60 mm; the third metacarpal is almost equal in length i.e. almost 95.9% to 98.83% of FA. The condylo-canine length of the skull is about 20 mm. Colonies typically have a strong smell. It is one of the cave dwelling bats observed in small groups of 10-12, at six areas such as Patas, Naldurga, (fort), Solapur (Old spinning mill premises), Old monument (Apsinga) and Buddhist Cave (Osmanabad), Cerivces of old temple wall (Dhamangaon). Locations: Patas; Dhamangaon, Solapur; Osmanabad caves; Apsinga; Naldurga. Previous records from Maharashtra: Arnala (Brosset 1962a); Bandra, Mumbai; Chanda; Malvan; Panchgani (Wroughton, 1913b); Amraoti; Nagpur (Gopalakrishna, 1954); Elephanta; Khandala; Ratnagiri (Brosset, 1962a); Ahmednagar (Joshi, In Molur et al., 2002); Rakeshwadi, Lonavala (Gaikwad, 2007).

Figure 5: Taphozous longimanus

30



Greater False Vampire (Fig. 6) Megaderma lyra

This bat species is commonly found in the study area. This is a robust species with an average fore arm length 66mm and the upper tooth row averages 11mm, thus exceeding M. spasma considerably in size. The oval ears have fringe of white hairs on the inner margins and the two lobes are joined between one third and half their length. The snout is naked and flesh colored. The lower jaw extends beyond the upper one. The nose leaf is straight and erect, about 10 mm in height and with a longitudinal median ridge. The base is simple and horizontal, but in M. spasma it is smaller, with convex side and distinctly heart shaped base. Dorsally the pelage is soft, moderately long and mouse colored, while ventrally it is almost white. They were found in various places in study area in groups of 40-200.. In Pothare, the population in a temple backyard was high,. In 2011, at Bhalavani, Mangalvedha due to renovation of an old house, the bat colony was found to be missing. While in Piliv, the fort owner has closed the entrance of the bat colony to remove the smell of bat guano. Osmanabad caves were also found under renovation for promotion as a tourist venue. Locations: Supe; Daund; Baramati; Piliv-Sangola; Bhalvani-Pandharpur; Indapur; Kurbavi-Malshiras; Bhalvani-Mangalvedha; Pothare-Karmala; Osmanabad caves. Previous records from Maharashtra: Chinchpali, Bulapur (Wroughton 1913b); Ramane Wadi, Khed (Wroughton, 1916a); Pune (McCann, 1934); Powai lake; Ellora, Aurngabad; Ajanta, Aurngabad; Ghodasgaum; Kanheri, Borivali (Brosset, 1962b); Ratnagiri; Gorthan, Nashik (Sinha, 1970); Bandra (Gopalakrishna & Badwaik, 1989); Junnar; Panshet; Mahad; Mulshi, Haveli; Bhor Rajewadi; Satara (Gaikwad, 2007). Figure 6: Megaderma lyra

Schneider’s Leaf-nosed Bat (Fig. 7) Hipposideros speoris

The supplementary leaflets are diagnostic for many Hipposideros species. The nose-leaf of H. speoris has three supplementary leaflets; the outer one inconspicuous. The median emargination of the anterior leaf-nose is not prominent. The upper edge of the intermediate leaf is concave. The posterior leaf is divided into four cells by three vertical septa and with slightly thickened upper edge. H. speoris was found using pilgrimage and historical places with very old temples and constructions. Millions of devotees visit such places and potentially disturb this species. We observed three colonies in different places at Pandharpur town in 2008, which were not seen in 2011, except a place called Kaikadi Maharaj math. Undisturbed areas such as an old mosque in Bhalvani and temple backyard at Pothare were found holding good populations of these bats. Locations: Bhimanagar; Indapur; Nira Narsingpur; Pothare, Karmala; Bhalavani, Pandharpur; Osmanabad caves; Kurduwadi. Previous records from Maharashtra: Bhor, Pune; Saswad, Pune; Satara (Hills, 1976); Borivali, kanheri; Elephanta; Alibag; Asgani; Pune (Shivkumara et al., 1984); Chanda (Blanford, 1988-91) Ranjangaon, Mawal, Pune; Saralgaon, Shirur; Ellora (Bates et al., 1994); Nanded; Chatushrungi cave, Pune; Shivneri Fort, Junnar; Matheran (Gaikwad, 2007). Figure 7: Hipposideros speoris

Egyptian Free-tailed Bat (Fig. 8) Tadarida aegyptiaca

This species can be identified from its medium size with the fleshy ears separated on the forehead. The tragus is small with a small angular projection. The antitragus is well developed. The skull is moderately long and the braincase is flattened. The median axis running from nasals to lambda is straight. The premaxillae are not co-ossified with palate. The pelage color is clove brown on the

31



dorsal side and distinctly pale almost whitish brown on the ventral side. The fur in general is short, soft and extends on the flanks. The membranes, ears and snout are brownish black in color. There is a prominent circular pad with middle depression on the sole of the foot as well as on the base of the thumb. A single individual was found near a temple wall at Dhamangaon, Solapur and a population of near about 60 individuals at an abandoned premise of a temple at Kunthalgiri, Osmanabad district. Its earlier distribution records also suggest that it is not a common species in survey area. Locations: Dhamangaon, Solapur; Kunthalgiri, Osmanabad. Previous records from Maharashtra: Aurangabad (Brosset, 1962c); Pune (Brosset, 1962c, Korad & Yardi, 1998-2001); Khondai, Mulshi (Gaikwad, 2007). Figure 8: Tadarida aegyptiaca

Asiatic Greater Yellow House Bat (Fig. 9) Scotophilus heathii

This species is medium-sized with relatively small ears that have a peculiar tragus with the tip projecting forwards. The braincase is narrow and deep. The second upper incisor (I3) is absent and the first two upper molars have their main cusps displaced outwards, thus the usual “W” pattern is distorted. It was also one of the cave dwelling bats which was observed in small groups of 1-3 individuals, at five areas such as fort (Naldurga), old spinning mill premises (Solapur), Apsinga (Old monument) and Osmanabad (Buddhist Cave), Dhamangaon (Cerivces of old temple wall). Locations: Bhima Koregaon; Daund; Nira Narsingpur; Jamb Indapur; Dhamangaon; Solapur. Previous records from Maharashtra: Nagpur (Khajuria, 1953); Panchgani; (Khajuria, 1953); Thana (Brosset, 1962c); Ajanta (Brosset, 1962c); Bandra; Andheri; Pune; Dhule; Chanda (BMNH); Elephanta (Brosset, 1962c); Bhor; Purandar Fort,

Pune; Deoghar-poladpur; Khed Shivapur; Karjat- Raigad (Gaikwad, 2007). Figure 9: Scotophilus heathii

Kuhl’s Pipistrelle (Fig. 10) Pipistrellus kuhlii

Kuhl’s Pipistrelle was recorded only once in a school building in urban area (Korad & Yardi, 1998-2000). A village boy from Nimblak, brought an injured bat to the first author, who identified the bat as a Kuhl’s Pipistrelle from external measurements. The wing membranes are translucent with a distinct white border on the patagium running between the foot and the fifth digit of the wing. The dorsal pelage was dark brown and slightly paler ventrally. The hair roots on the ventral body surface have darker base. The snout, ears and wing membranes are uniformly brown. The tragus is inwardly curved, with a narrow tip and the outer border lacks triangular projection. The medium sized pipistrelle with forearm length 35mm. It differs from other closely related species in dental peculiarities. I2 is unicuspid, I3 and Pm2 are small, about one half or less in the crown area of I2. The tip of I3 extends slightly beyond the cingulum of I2. The wing membranes are translucent and the most characteristic feature is the presence of distinct white border on the patagium running between the foot and the fifth digit. The dorsal pelage is dark brown and slightly paler ventrally. The hair roots on the ventral body surface have darker base. The snout, ears and wing membranes are uniformly brown. The tragus is inwardly curved, but the tip is narrow and the outer border is

32



lacking triangular projection, the presence of which is the peculiarity of P. savii. The skull is long, its dorsal profile is almost straight and the lambdoid crest in front of the small triangular area is well developed. Pm2 is displaced inwardly and as a result the upper canine and pm4 seem to be in contact. Pm2 ias smaller, about half of Pm4 in height and crown area. Location: Nimblak, Satara Previous records from Maharashtra: Pune (Korad & Yardi, 1998-2000).

Figure 10: Pipistrellus kuhlii

Savi’s Pipistrelle (Fig. 11) Hypsugo savii

This is a medium sized bat species with uniformly dark brown long, soft and dense pelage. Ventrally the hair bases are darker, while the tips are pale in color. The snout, ears and wing membranes are uniformly dark brown. The muzzle ias naked and flat. The membranes are translucent. The ear lobes are long and broad at the base. The tip of the ear lobe is rounded. The tragus is long, inwardly curved with a blunt tip. On its outer margin on the lower half, there is a triangular projection. The tail is significantly shorter than the head and body length. Supraorbital tubercles are small while braincase is low, flat and elongate. Basisphenoid pits are lacking. Inner upper incisor I2 is bicuspid. I3 is half or more of height of I2, but similar in crown area. Pm2 is little reduced in crown area, about two thirds of that of I2. Postorbital region, supraorbital region and rostrum are moderately widened. Supraorbital tubercles are small. Braincase is low, flat and elongate. This is a medium sized bat with uniformly dark brown long, silky, soft and dense pelage. Ventrally the hair bases are darker, while the tips are pale in color. The snout, ears and wing membranes are uniformly dark brown. The muzzle is naked and flat. The membranes are translucent. The ear lobes are long and broad at the base. The tip

of the ear lobe is rounded. The tragus is long, inwardly curved and with blunt tip. On its outer margin on the lower half, there is a triangular projection. The tail is significantly shorter than the head and body length. Only three earlier records are available from the Maharashtra). Based on our observations we believe that Savi’s Pipistrelle is also a common species which has not been studied properly. Locations: Nimblak, Phaltan, Satara; Kololi, Baramati; Solapur city; Apsinga, Tuljapur; Osmanabad caves. Previous records from Maharashtra: Pune city (Korad & Yardi, 1998-2000); Bhaje caves; Mulshi, Pune (Gaikwad, 2007). Figure 11: Hypsugo savii Discussion In the present survey 11 bat species were reported from the study area. We believe that the relative humidity and type of habitat are crucial factors for these bats. Large old trees were usually preferred by Pteropus giganteus and small trees such as Ashoka Polyalthia longifolia and other fruit trees were used by Cynopterus spinx. Old buildings, temples, tunnels and forts, which mainly include similar ecological conditions, are highly suitable to cave bats. The disturbed natural habitats have also compelled the cave bats to occupy some manmade constructions as their habitat, where these species were sustained successfully. It was apparent that all of the above mentioned bat species are much more widely distributed than was previously recorded and populations occur in areas for which only single or scattered records were previously available. Nevertheless, as we observed at several sites, even these species were sensitive to disturbance from people. Rapid developmental activities might still be an important factor for the

33



survival of bats in the study area. We therefore recommend further studies to document the current status and distribution of the bats. Threats In the recent study it was observed that many old structures as houses, caves, temples were under renovation. Road ways construction, township projects, tourism, development of agricultural land removing natural vegetation etc. are also affecting bat fauna. Some mortality is due to trapping in nylon nets put around fruit crops such as vineyards. Thus it is important to study the impact of changing habitat and loss of suitable areas on survival of bats in the region (Jones et al., 2009) with the help of a continuous bat monitoring programme. The uncontrolled use of chemical fertilizers and insecticides may have an effect on the food source of insectivorous bats. Pesticides may pose some detrimental effects on bat populations as seen in Clark et al. (1983). Extermination of colonies by pest control operators and Public Health Departments has also been responsible for the elimination of many bats in urban areas. We observed that availability of natural water was also one of the influential factors for distribution of bat species in the study area. Figure 12: A bat trapped in nylon net at an orchard. Conservation recommendations Forts, temples, devrai or sacred groves were found as important habitats for bats and should remain untouched by the activities such as renovation. Care needs to taken to protect the natural roosting habitats. Survey and monitoring of the bat colonies from study area should be encouraged with help of volunteers and local NGOs. Under the process of afforestation, indigenous plant species should be preferred over exotic plants.

Ecosystem services provided by the bats should be studied and conservation of bats should be promoted as the important bio-indicators (Jones et al., 2009). Acknowledgements We are thankful to Somnath, Shivaji Narwade, Divya Varier, Mahesh Gadkar, Bharat Cheda, Vaibhav Vanjari and Rameshwar Fugare for their support during the field surveys and data compilation. We are also thankful to Matthew Struebig, Judith Eger and an anonymous reviewer for reviewing the manuscript. Literature cited Bastawade, A. D. and A. S. Mahabal, 1976. Some behavioral aspects of the Indian flying fox Pteropus giganteus giganteus. Bio-Vigyanam, 2 (2): 209-212. Bates, P. J. J. and D. L. Harrison, 1997. Bats of the Indian subcontinent. Harrison Zoological Museum Publication, Bowerwood House, St. Botolph’s Road, Sevenoaks, Kent TN 13 3AQ, England: Bates, P. J. J., D. L. Harrison and M. Muni, 1994. The bats of Western India. Part 3: Journal of Bombay Natural History. Society, 91: 360-380. Blanford, W. T., 1888-91. The Fauna of British India,Mammalia. Taylor and Francis, London: 617. Brosset, A., 1962a. The bats of Central and Western India. Part I. Journal of Bombay Natural History. Society, 59: 1- 57. Brosset, A., 1962b. The bats of Central and Western India. Part II. Journal of Bombay Natural History. Society, 59: 583-624. Brosset, A.,1962c. The bats of Central and Western India. Part III. Journal of Bombay Natural History. Society, 59: 707-746. Brosset, A., 1962d. The bats of Central and Western India. Part IV. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 60: 337- 355. Champion, H. G. and S. K. Seth, 1968. The forest types of India. The manager of publications. Delhi: Clark, D. R., R. Clawson and C. Stafford, 1983. Gray bats killed by dieldrin at two additional Missouri caves: Aquatic invertebrates found dead. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 30: 214-218.

34



Das, P. K and Y. P. Sinha, 1971. Taxonomic and biological notes on the Shortnosed Fruit Bat, Cynopterus sphinx (Vahl) from West Bengal. Proceedings zoological Society, Calcutta, 24: 157- 162 Davison, G. W. H. and A. Zubaid, 1992. Food habits of the lesser false vampire, Megaderma spasma, from Kunla Lompat, Peninsular Malaysia. Zeitschrift Saugetierk, 57 (5): 310-332. Eckrich, M. and G. Neuweiler, 1988. Food habits of the sympatric insectivorous bat Rhinolophus rouxi and Hipposideros lankadiva from Sri Lanka. Journal of Zoology, 215: 729-737. Gaikwad, M. C., 2007. Study on diversity and habitat preference of cave bats (Chiroptera) in the central Western Ghats of Maharashtra. Ph.D. thesis submitted to the University of Pune, through Department of Zoology, Fergusson College, Pune: Gopalakrishna, A., 1954. Breeding habits of the Indian sheath tailed bat Taphozous longimanus (Hardwicke). Current Science, 23: 60-61. Gopalakrishna, A. and N. Badwaik, 1989. Breeding habits and association phenomena in some Indian bats. Part 12. Megaderma lyra (Geoffroy) (Megadermatidae) at different latitudes. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 86 (1): 42-45. Hallam, T. G., A. Raghavan, H. Kolli, D. T. Dimitrov, P. Federico, Hairong Qi, G. F. McCracken, M. Betke, J. K. Westbrook, K. Kennard and T. H. Kunz, 2010. Dense and sparse aggregations in complex motion: Video coupled with simulation modeling. Ecological Complexity, 7: 69–75. Hill, J. E., 1976. Further records of Myotis peshwa (Thomas 1915) (Chiroptera Vespertilionidae) from the Indian peninsula. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 73 (3): 433-437. Hill, J. E. and J. D. Smith, 1984. Bats: A Natural history. British Museum of Natural History: 243. Jones, G., D. S. Jacobs, T. H. Kunz, M. R. Willig and P. A. Racey , 2009. Carpe Noctem: the importance of bats as bioindicators. Endangered Species Research, 8: 93–115. Khajuria, H., 1953. Taxonomic studies on some Indian Chiroptera. Records Indian Museum, 50: 113-128.

Korad, V. S. and K. D. Yardi, 1998-2001. Ecological study of bats in Pune. UGC minor project: Korad, V. S. and M. C. Gaikwad, 2006. Study of distribution of water bats (Genus Myotis ) in the part of Northern Western Ghats of India. Proceedings of 17th All India Congress of Zoology: Korad, V. S., R. Raut and K. D. Yardi, 2007. Diversity and distribution of bats in the Western Ghats of India. Zoos Print Journal, 22 (7): 2752-2758. Kunz, T. H., 1982. Roosting ecology of bats. In. Ecology of Bats, Kunz, T. H. (ed.). Plenum press, New York: 1-55 McCann, C., 1934. Notes on the Flying-Fox (Pteropus giganteus Brunn.). Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 37: 143-149 Mickleburgh, S. P., A. M. Hutson and P. A. Racey, 2002. A review of the global conservation status of bats. Oryx, 6 (1): 18-34. Molur, S., G. C. Marimuthu, Srinivasulu, S. Mistry, A. M. Hutson, P. J. J. Bates, S. Walker, K. Padma Priya and A. R. Binu Priya, 2002. Status of South Asian Chiroptera: Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (C.A.M.P) Workshop Report. Zoo Outreach Organization, CBSG South Asia and WILD, Coimbatore, India: 141. Moghe, M. A., 1951. Development and placentation of the Indian Fruit bat, Pteropus giganteus giganteus (BruIU1ich) Proceedings Zoological. Society of London, 121: 703-721. Pierson, E. D. and W. E. Rainey, 1998. Distribution, Habitat Associations, Status, and Survey Methodologies for Three Molossid Bat Species, (Eumops perotis, Nyctinomops femorosaccus, Nyctinomops macrotis) and the Vespertilionid (Euderma maculatum). Final report, California Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Management Division, Bird and Mammal Conservation Program: 62. Rainey, W. E. and E. D. Pierson, 1992. Distribution of Pacific Island flying foxes, Proceedings of the Pacific Island Flying fox Conservation Conference, USFWS, Biology Report No. 90, Washington, D. C.: 111-121. Shivkumara S., N., P. M. Reddy and M. Kameswari, 1984. Host-parasite relationship: posthelminth infection muscle protein changes in bat Hipposideros speoris. Current Science. 53 (4): 207-208.

35



Sinha, Y. P., 1970. Taxonomic notes on some Indian bats. Mammalia, 34: 81-92. Srinivasulu, C., P. A. Racey and S. Mistry, 2010. A key to the bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) of South Asia. Journal of Threatened Taxa, 2 (7): 1001-1076. Swift, S. M., 1980. Activity patterns of pipistrelle bats (Pipistrellus) in north-east Scotland. Journal of Zoology, 190: 285–295. Wroughton, R. C., 1912. Report No. 1: East Khandesh. Bombay Natural History Society’s Mammal Survey of India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 21 (2): 391-410. Wroughton, R. C., 1913a. Report No 6. Kanara Central Provinces. Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 22 (1): 29-44. Wroughton, R. C., 1913b. Report No 7. Central Provinces. Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 22 (1): 45-58. Wroughton, R. C., 1913c. Report No 8. (with K.V. Ryley) Vijayanagar- Central Provinces. Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 22 (1): 58-66. Wroughton, R. C., 1916a. Report No 20. Chindwin River. Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India, Burma and Ceylon. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 24: 291-309. Wroughton, R. C., 1916b. Report No 21. Gwalior. Bombay-Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India, Burma and Ceylon. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 24: 309-310. Wroughton, R. C., 1916c. Report No 22. Koyna Valley, Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India, Burma and Ceylon. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 24: 311-316. Wroughton, R. C. and W. M. Davidson, 1920a. Report No. 30: Dekhan, Poona District. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 26: 1025-1030.

36

TAPROBANICA VOL. 04: NO. 01

Plate 02 Figure 13: Distribution of bats in South-West region of Deccan, Maharashtra – India: 1. Patas; 2. Daund; 3. Girim; 4. Supe; 5. Baramati; 6. Nimblak; 7. Bhimanagar; 8. Jamb; 9. Kurbavi; 10. Natepute; 11. Indapur; 12. Malshiras; 13. Akluj; 14. Malinagar; 15. Niranarsinghpur; 16. Temburni; 17. Karnala; 18. Pothare; 19. Kurduwadi; 20. Piliv; 21. Maloli; 22. Pandharpur; 23. Bhalvani (pandharpur); 24. Sangola road (mangalvedha); 25. Bhalvani (mangalvedha); 26. Mangalvedha; 27. Mandrup; 28. Chincholi-South Solapur; 29. Solapur city; 30. Kegaon-hiraj road; 31. Naldurga Fort; 32. Kati; 33. Dhamangaon; 34. Sindfal; 35. Aapsinga; 36. Osmanabad city; 37. Kini; 38. Jagji; 39. Kunthalgiri; 40. Paranda; 41. Barshi; 42. Pangaon; 43. Bhimakoregaon.


GASTROINTESTINAL PARASITES OF CAPTIVE PRIMATES IN THE NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS OF SRI LANKA Sectional Editor: Colin Chapman Submitted: 05 August 2011, Accepted: 15 April 2012

Umanga C. Gunasekera1,3, Susiji Wickramasinghe1, Ganga Wijesinghe2 and R. P. V. J. Rajapakse1 1 Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine & Animal Science, University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka 2 The National Zoological Gardens of Sri Lanka, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka E-mail: 3 [email protected] Abstract Fifteen species of primates from different geographic areas are living in captivity at the National Zoological Gardens of Sri Lanka. As a result of limited space in the Zoo and ever increasing visitors, there is a possibility to increase the incidence of human animal contact. Therefore, it is important to identify potential parasitic infections that can be transferred from humans to animals and vise versa. In the present study, the primates were investigated for the gastrointestinal parasites. Total of 85 fecal samples were collected from all the species and examined for the presence of helminthes and protozoa. Balantidium sp., Entamoeba coli, Giardia sp., Blastocystis sp. and coccidial oocytes including Cryptosporidium sp. oocysts were identified. Furthermore, Nematodes and Cestodes were also recorded. Key words: Helminthes, nematodes, cestodes, protozoa, parasitic infections, oocytes. Introduction Several kinds of gastrointestinal parasites were reported in both captive and non-captive primates in the world (Brack, 1987; Bruno et al., 2007; Hendricks, 1977; Muriuki et al., 1998; Soulsby, 1982; Tachibana et al., 2009). In Sri Lanka few studies have been carried out on identifying the gastrointestinal parasites in the primates and only handful of publications available on the captive animals in the zoo (e.g. Amarasinghe et al., 2009) while there are few on non-captive fauna in the zoo premises (Karunarathna et al., 2007; 2008). From Sri Lankan primates helminthes protozoa are

reported in Macaca sinica (Dewit et al., 1991; Ekanayake et al., 2004) in the wild. The reported species were Trichostrongylus sp., Strongyloid sp., Oesophagustomum spp., Cestoda sp. and Hymenolepsis sp. The identified ciliates were Giardia sp., Balantidium sp. Entamoeba histolytica, Entamoeba coli, Entamoeba hartmanni and Blastocystis spp. and the coccidian parasite Cryptosporidium sp. The genus level identification was done using the PCR method. Cryptosporidium and other protozoan infections (Entamoeba sp., Iodamoeba sp., Chilomastix sp. and Balantidium


GASTROINTESTINAL PARASITES OF CAPTIVE PRIMATES


sp.) in wild Trachypithecus vetulus are also reported (Ekanayake et al., 2004). Materials and Methods Study Area: The National Zoological Gardens is approximately 10 hectares in extent. It is located in the wet zone of Sri Lanka (6º51’ 21.48” - 6º51’ 30.30” N and 79º 52’ 20.08” - 79º52’ 33.99” E) (Karunarathna et al., 2008) at a mean elevation of 25 m above sea level. The nearest city is Dehiwala (2 km) and its proximity to the city of Colombo (11 km) makes it an easily accessible location for the potential visitors (Weinman, 1957). There are 15 species of primates in the national zoo and apart from that large numbers of wild animal species are housed in the premises. Approximately 100 species of mammals, 110 species of birds, 35 species of

reptiles, butterflies and marine vertebrates constitute this collection. There are 16 sections in the national zoo. Sample collection: Study period was 7 months commencing from August 2009 up to February 2010. Total of 85 fecal samples were collected throughout the study period. Fresh voided fecal samples were collected from the ground in the morning and they were transferred to the laboratory. The number of animals in each cage and the number of samples collected from each cage was recorded (Table 1). Sample collection was done once per every month during the study period. For the transportation, air tight samples were kept in styrofoam boxes with ice.

Table 1: Details of the samples collected and examined.

Common name Scientific name No. of animals in each cage

No. of samples collected & examined

Section 03 Siamang gibbon Symphalangus syndactylus 1 3 Grey langur Semnopithecus entellus 1 - Toque monkey Macaca sinica 8 4

Section 08 Japanese monkey Macaca fuscata 3 2 Formosan monkey Macaca cyclopis 1 3 Siamang gibbon Symphalangus syndactylus 1 - Silver leaf monkey Trachypithecus cristatus 7 6 White handed gibbon Hylobates lar 1 2 Squirrel monkey Saimiris ciureus 1 5 Capuchin Cebus capucinus 1 6 Sooty mangabey Cercocebus aterrimus 1 6

Section 11 Orang-utan Pongo pygmaeus 4 5 Toque monkey Macaca sinica 4 5 Grey langur Semnopithecus entellus 2 4 Japanese monkey Macaca fuscata 2 5

Sections 13 and 14 Chimpanzees Pan troglodytes 6 5

Section 15 Hamadryas baboon Papio hamadryas 1 4 Toque monkey Macaca sinica 5 3 Hooded Capuchin Cebus apella 1 3 Black cheeked white nosed monkey Cercopithecus ascanius 1 2 Patas monkey Erythrocebus patas 1 2 Hamadryas baboon Papio hamadryas 1 4 Grey langur Semnopithecus entellus 4 5

GUNASEKERA ET AL., 2012


Primate species Hook TrichurisStrongyleNematodAscarisCryptoCocci.BalantiBlast EntamGiardiaMorph Morpho wormeggs eggs larvae eggs cyst spp. spp. 1 2

Symphalangus syndactylus +ve +ve +veSemnopithecus entellus +ve +ve +ve +veMacaca sinica +ve +ve +ve +ve +ve +ve +veMacaca fuscata +ve +ve +veMacaca cyclopis +ve +vePresbytis cristata +veSaimiri sciureusCebus capucinus +veCercocebus atys +vePongo pygmaeus +ve +ve +vePan troglodyte +ve +ve +vePapio hamadryas +ve +ve +ve +veCebus apellaCercopithecus ascanius Erythrocebus patas+ (positive)

Identification: To determine the presence of parasites/eggs/cyst, following techniques were performed. Direct fecal smear observation Iodine stain: Lugo’s iodine was used. To isolate helminthes eggs: salt flotation technique Detection of protozoan cysts: sugar flotation technique and/or Acetic acid–ether concentration technique Identification of the Cryptosporidium oocysts: Ziehl-Neelsen staining technique. Species identification: PCR (Gene Amp® PCR system 9700) was done using genomic DNA and E. coli specific primers (Forward-5’-GAATGTCAAAGCTAATACTTGACG-3’ and Reverse-5’GATTTCTACAATTCTCTTGGCATA-3’). Promega Wizard® Genomic purification kit was used for the DNA extraction.PCR conditions were used as previously described by Tachibana et al. (2009). Amplified products were visualized in 1.5% agarose gel containing Ethidum bromide. DNA ladder (100 bp) was used as a marker to determine the length of the amplicons.

Culturing procedure of the protozoa: After morphological identification for further identification of protozoa, some of the fresh positive samples are directly cultured in the modified Tanabe-Chiba medium at 37ºC. Two sub cultures were done every twenty four hours later consequently according to Nilles-Bije & Rivera (2009) Results and discussion In the present study, we have identified several species of protozoa (Cryptosporidum sp., Balantidium sp., Blastocyst sp., Entamoeba sp., Giardia sp., and coccidian) in the chimpanzee, orang-utan, hamadryas baboon, Japanese macaque, siamang, toque monkey, grey langur, silvered leaf monkey, sooty Mangabey and Formosan monkey (Fig.1). Two protozoan cysts were not identified morphologically (morpho 1, morpho 2) due to the variations in shape, size and the internal structures. In PCR study, we successfully amplified 180 bp in length fragment using E. coli specific primers. Therefore, we confirmed that the species as a pathogenic E. coli. Furthermore, Nematode larvae (hook worm) and eggs (Ascaris, Strongyle and Trichuris types) were identified in some of the primate species (Table 2).

Table 2: The helminth eggs protozoan cysts detected in each primate species

GASTROINTESTINAL PARASITES OF CAPTIVE PRIMATES


Figure 1: morphology of some of the protozoan cysts and nematode eggs identified (Magnification × 40) (A) Morpho 1 sp.; (B) Blastocystis cyst; (C) Enatamoeba cyst; (D) Giardia cyst; (E) Nematode egg; (F) Cryptosporidium cyst The presences of gastrointestinal parasites have been reported in both captive and non-captive primates. Rarely, infected primates show clinical signs of particular parasitic diseases. More often, parasitic diseases are contracted when animals are immunosuppressed due to malnutrition, stress or as a result of heavy parasitic load. Ziehl-Neelsen staining technique was used for the identification of Cryptosporidium oocysts. These oocysts were difficult to demonstrate during routine fecal examination because of the smaller size (size 2-6 µm). Therefore, acid-fast technique was used for the detection of oocysts. Originally the oocyst after staining should appear bright red. Due to the staining technical errors here it appears in slight pinkish colour. Cryptosporidium species is the most common protozoa found among the monkeys. It was reported that these monkeys are frequenting the areas and water that has been soiled by humans (Ekanayake et al., 2004). Similarly, in our study, we found that Cryptosporidium sp. was presented in primates of Dehiwala Zoo. Furthermore, there were

no new animals introduced to the already existing primate population during the study period. Therefore, there is a possibility that the primates have acquired it from contaminated food, human contact or environment. To confirm that it is the same parasite genus that is affecting both non-human primates and humans further detailed studies should be carried out at both morphological and molecular level. It is also possible that the primate is the preferred host and therefore the humans are not infected. Gasser et al. (2004) screening of the workers for suspected zoonoses is also a must in the same manner. In this study most of the parasite identification has been done only up to the genus level. Further studies should be carried out to determine the zoonotic potential of the identified parasitic spp. Coccidial oocysts were detected in the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). These primates had diarrhea and had been treated previously. It might be due to

40

GUNASEKERA ET AL., 2012


cocccidial infection. Although, coccidial oocysts were recorded in several other species of primates during the study period however, they did not show any clinical signs. In North America, researchers have identified Coccidial oocysts in chimpanzee. Moreover, it has been confirmed as Isospora species based on morphology (Hendricks, 1977). Cestodes and Trichuris species were also found in some primates. Balantidium species and Ascaris eggs were isolated in Toque monkeys. Balantidium species reported in our study is morphologically similar to Balantidium coli. In addition, we were able to identify Giardia sp., Entamoeba coli and Blastocystis sp. in most of the primates. However, they did not show any clinical signs of infection. The culturing of the protozoa was done to perform a more accurate identification using the motile trophozoites. For culturing, both fresh and filtered positive samples were used. Filtered sample was used to reduce the inhibiting factors (Nilles-Bije & Rivera, 2009). However, it was not successful. This may be due to culturing of cysts instead of motile trophozoites or otherwise. We suspect that primates acquired these parasitic infections mainly through contaminated foods or environment. Other concerns are stocking density of primates and the same keeper handling the different species of animals. Therefore, further studies are required to determine the source of parasitic infection. Acknowledgements Authors would like to thank K. B. A. T. Bandara for the technical assistance during the study. Literature cited Amarasinghe, A. A. T., M. S. Botejue, L. E. Harding, 2009. Social behaviours of captive Trachypithecus cristatus (mammalia: cercopithecidae) in the national zoological gardens of Sri Lanka. Taprobanica, 1 (1): 66-73. Brack, M., 1987. Agents transmissible from simians to man. Springer-verlag, London: 454. Bruno B. C., A. Belltto, X. M. Francois, 2007. Wild life, exotic pets and emerging zoonoses. Emerging Infectious Disease, 13 (1): 6-11. Dewit I., P. J. Dittus, J. Vercruysse, A. Eileen, D. I. Gibson, 1991. Gastro-intestinal helminths in a natural population of Macaca sinica and Presbytis sp. at Polonnaruwa, Sri Lanka Primates, 32 (3): 391-395.

Ekanayake, K., A. Arulkanthan, N. U. Horadagoda, G. K. M. Sanjeevani, R. Kieft, S. Gunathilaka, P. J. Dittus, 2004. Prevalence of Cryptosporidium and other parasites enteric parasites among wild non–human primates in Polonnaruwa, Sri Lanka. The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 74 (2); 322-329. Gasser, R. B., J. M. de Gruijter and A. M. Polderman, 2009. The utility of molecular methods for elucidating primate-pathogen relationships the Oesophagostomum bifurcum example: 47-62. In: Primate parasite ecology: the dynamics and study of host-parasite relationships, M. A. Huffman and C. A. Chapman (eds.). Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press. Hendricks, L. D., 1977. Host range characteristics of the primate coccidian, Isospora arctopitheci Rodhain, 1933 (Protozoa: Eimeriidae). The Journal of Veterinary Parasitology, 63: 32-33 Karunarathna, D. M. S. S., A. A. T. Amarasinghe, P. I. K. Pebotuwage and A. A. D. S. Udayakumara, 2007. A study of the non captive avifaunal diversity in the National Zoological Gardens, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka. Siyoth, 2 (2): 25-29. Karunarathna, D. M. S. S., A. A. T. Amarasinghe and A. De Vos, 2008. Preliminary notes on the monitor lizards (Family: Varanidae) within the National Zoological Gardens (NZG) Dehiwala, Colombo District, Sri Lanka. Biawak, 2 (3): 109-118. Muriuki S. M. K., Murugu R. K., Munene E., Karere G.M., Chai D.C., 1998. Some gastrointestinal parasites of zoonotic(public health) importance commonly observed in old world non-human primates in Kenya. Acta Tropica 71(1): 73-82. Nilles-Bije, M. L. and L. W. Rivera, 2009. Ultra structural and molecular characterization of Balantidium coli isolated in the Philippines. Parasitology Research, 106: 387-394. Soulsby, E. J. L., 1982. Helminths, Arthropods and Protozoa of Domesticated Animals. 6th edition, Bailliere Tindall, London: 56-58. Tachibana, H., T. Yanagi, A. Akatsuka, S. Kobayashi, H. Kanbara, V. Tsutsumi, 2009. Isolation and characterization of potentially virulent species Entamoeba nuttalli from captive Japanese macaques. Parasitology, 136 (10): 1169-1177. Weinman, A. N., 1957. A zoological guide to the Zoological Gardens of Ceylon. Government press of Ceylon: 73.

41


EXPANDED DESCRIPTION OF Enhydris dussumierii (DUMÉRIL, BIBRON & DUMÉRIL, 1854) (REPTILIA: COLUBRIDAE: HOMALOPSINAE) Sectional Editor: Gernot Vogel Submitted: 04 March 2012, Accepted: 09 April 2012

S. R. Chandramouli 1, Baiju 2, J. J. Sebastien 3 and S. R. Ganesh 1,4 1 Deptment of Zoology, A. V. C. College, Mannampandal, Mayiladuthurai 609305, TamilNadu, India 2 Poojapura Open Snake Park, Agada Thandra Serpentarium, Thiruvananthapuram 695004, Kerala, India 3 Thiruvananthapuram Zoological Park and Museum, Palayam, Thiruvananthapuram 695033, Kerala, India 4 Chennai Snake Park,Rajbhavan post, Chennai 600022,Tamil Nadu, India Email: [email protected] Abstract Description of a poorly-known endemic Indian homalopsid water snake Enhydris dussumierii is expanded based on character state data obtained anew from newly examined live and preserved specimens in captive facilities. Knowledge on the natural history of this uncommon, endemic species is supplemented by our observations. Further field surveys in southwestern Indian coastal plains are recommended for fully documenting the geographic range of this species. Key words: Morphology, scalation, body form, colouration, distribution, India Introduction The Oriental, homalopsid, water snake genus Enhydris Sonnini & Latrielle, 1802 currently comprises 25 valid species that are characterized by large head shields, smooth scales, nasals in contact behind rostral, a single or double internasal posterior to the nasals, 19-33 midbody scalerows, 105-172 ventrals, 23-92 subcaudals. They are distributed from the Indus River Valley of Pakistan in the northwest to the Queensland coast of Australia in the southeast. Only two species, E. enhydris (Schneider, 1799) and E. plumbea (Boie, 1827) are widespread, while the remaining 23 species are restricted to drainage systems and coastlines of specific bioregions and ecoregions and

are consequently poorly-known in terms of systematics, ecology and life-history traits (Murphy, 2007). Enhydris dussumierii (Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854) is one of the poorly-known members of this genus, endemic to a small geographical region, i.e., the southwestern coastal plains of India, in Kerala state. This species was originally described as Eurostus dussumierii based on two syntypes MNHN 3751 and 3752 collected by Jean-Jacques Dussumier from “Côte de Malabar, Inde” and “Bengale” respectively (Fig. 1). Currently one subjective junior synonym Hypsirhina malabarica


DUSSUMIER’S SMOOTH WATER SNAKE


Werner 1924 (synonymy fide, Smith, 1943) is known and since its name bearing type is believed to be lost (Smith, 1943). Hypsirhina malabarica was synonymized under Enhydris dussumierii by Smith (1943) without comparing the type of H. malabarica. Therfore Gyi (1970) and Murphy (2007) considered the status of H. malabarica is uncertain; hence its systematic status remains as yet unresolved. Gyi (1970) and Murphy (2007) provided modern-day redescriptions of the two syntypes of Enhydris dussumierii. Moreover Murphy (2007) provided additional localities from near its type locality and also published in-life colour photographs by Ingrid Simpson. Three more individuals were sighted in Vellayani Lake ca. 200 airline km south of its known distribution and their morphology, prey, total length and tail length were documented (Kumar & Captain, 2011). This apart, nothing is known about the taxonomy of this species.

Figure 1: Syntypes of Enhydris dussumierii; (A) MNHN 3751, (B) MNHN 3752. Despite Duméril et al.’s description in 1854 and the subsequent recognition by Jan (1868), some renowned treatises on Indian reptiles (Günther, 1864; Theobald, 1876; Boulenger, 1890) did not

mention this species in their works. This pitiful plight parallels just a few hand-picked Indian snakes like Coluber vittacaudatus Blyth, 1854 and Tropidolaemus huttoni (Smith, 1949) (see Whitaker & Captain, 2004). Even after Smith´s (1943) inclusion into the Indian snake fauna, more recent works on Indian snakes (Daniel, 2002; Das, 2002; Whitaker & Captain, 2004), did not throw light on this species owing to lack of adequate data. The natural history of this species is only available in Parameshwaran (1954, 1963). Gyi (1970) and Murphy (2007) unfortunately miswrote the status and numbers of the type specimens of E. dussumierii (see Kumar & Captain, 2011). Kumar & Captain (2011) wrote “The species was first described by Duméril et al. (1854) as E. dussumieri [sic]” and “Scientific nomenclature is that used by Whitaker and Captain (2004) - Enhydris dussumierii, instead of Enhydris dussumieri as listed by Murphy (2007), Gyi (1970) and Smith (1943)”. Unfortunately, Kumar & Captain (2011) overlooked the fact that Duméril et al. (1854) originally described this species as “Euroste De Dussumier Eurostus Dussumierii Nobis” and therefore dussumierii is the original correct spelling. Moreover, Kumar & Captain’s mention of “E. dussumieri [sic]” leaves little clue as to whether their “E.” refers to generic name Eurostus or Enhydris. Sadly, Parameshwaran (1954, 1963) incorrectly attributed the taxon authorship of E. dussumierii. Materials and Methods We examined 10 individuals (nine live and one preserved, i.e. nearly twice the number of documented specimens), maintained in captive facilities (zoological parks) in Thiruvananathapuram, Kerala. Scale counts, measurements and colour pattern data were recorded from nine live and one preserved specimens. Anterior dorsal scale rows were counted at one head length posterior to head, midbody scalerows were counted at the middle of snout-vent length and posterior scalerows were counted at one head length anterior to vent. Scales after the preventrals up to the scale before the anal scale were counted as ventrals (Dowling, 1951). The terminal scute was excluded from the number of subcaudals. Scales between rostral and the final scale bordering jaw angle were counted as supralabials, those touching eye, given within parenthesis. Scales between mental and scale below last supralabial were counted as infralabials, those touching genials given within parenthesis. Scales surrounded by supralabials, postoculars and

A

B

CHANDRAMOULI ET AL., 2012


parietals were counted as temporals. Symmetrical head scalation character values were given in the order of left / right. Measurements except snout-vent and total lengths, which were measured with a standard measuring tape, were taken using vernier calipers and expressed to the nearest millimeter. Dentition and primary sexual characters were not examined as we were working with live captive animals on exhibit. Snakes were photographed using Canon EOS 400D and Powershot A620 model digital cameras. Geographic coordinates and altitude (in meters above sea level) were recorded using Google Earth Software ver. 5.0 beta. Observations and discussion

Enhydris dussumierii (Duméril, Bibron and Duméril, 1854)

Body form (mean values in mm): Overall build stocky and robust; snout moderately rounded; eyes and nostrils placed dorsally; head slightly longer than broad (head length: 27, head width: 25.5); neck slightly evident (head width: 25.5, neck width: 22); nostril closer to snout-tip (2) and then to lip (3.5) than to eye (6.5); eye diameter: 2.5; distance between snout-tip and posterior endpoint of parietals nearly half of that between snout-tip and jaw-angle; snout to vent length: 617; total length: 700; tail small (relative tail length: 11 % of total length) (Fig. 2). Scalation: Rostral visible from above, smaller than nasal, triangular, broader than long; nasal pierced by nostril, squarish, rounded or bean-shaped, with a nasal cleft; internasals 2, smaller than nasals, posterior to nasals, triangular, touching each other, this side the shortest, trapezoidal, with a median division; together these scales as broad as rostral, but shorter than combined width of both the nasals or both the prefrontals; prefrontals 2; frontal longer than broad, pentagonal, posteriorly tapering triangularly towards a point where it gets higher than posterior edge of supraocular; supraocular much shorter than frontal, trapezoidal, its anterior margin bordering a small scale, thus separated from upper margin of loreal; loreal 1, horizontally rectangular to trapezoid, subequal to orbit but as big as basal postocular and anterior temporal, in contact with 2nd supralabial; parietals nearly twice as long as broad, lung-shaped, contacting at midline by an indented medial suture that starts from edge of frontal, the suture’s length equal to maximum width of parietal, parietal posteriorly divided into Y-shape; occipital small, rhomboid; preocular 1,

pentagonal, higher than broad, as high as orbit, higher than loreal, narrowly elongate, fully touching supraocular, just touching prefrontal but not internasal, from which it is separated by the small scale as mentioned earlier, in contact with 3rd supralabial; postoculars two, basal one larger, trapezoid and in full contact with 5th supralabial; anterior temporal 1, six sided, as large as loreal and basal postocular; posterior temporals 2-3, lower one larger, almost twice as large as the upper one; basal one mildly contacts 6th supralabial while the upper one contacts parietal; supralabials 8-9 (4th-5th touching eye), higher than broad, squarish or vertically rectangular; sometimes with small triangular scales between 4th, 5th and 6th scales; 6th one largest, six sided, bulged, contributing to the head height / depth, 7th and 8th ones horizontally divided into upper and lower; infralabials 12-13 (5th-7th touching genials), progressively smaller, 1st one narrow and elongate, extending towards anterior genials; posterior genials smaller, 1/4th the size of anterior; linguals 8-9, contributing to posterior commencement of preventrals; preventrals 3, broken-up anteriorly, but yet broader than surrounding scales; suture dividing genials deep, with a furrow and extensible interstitial skin; gular scales, homogenous, as large as linguals, almost similarly oriented (i.e., posterodorsally); ventrals 142-151, angulate laterally, narrow; coastals rhomboid, homogenous throughout, two outermost scalerows slightly larger; dorsals smooth, not imbricate, glossy; anterior scalerows 29, reducing to 27 [3+4 3 / 4+5 4] at 6th-12th (x=9) ventral; midbody scalerow 27, reducing to 25 (n=3) or 23 (n=7) [2+3 2 / 4+5 4] at 109th-131st (x=120) ventral; anal divided; subcaudals 27-40 pairs, divided. Colouration in life: Dorsum dull to reddish or olivaceous brown from 5th/6th to 19th/21st scalerows; three black stripes, one in the middle flanked by the other two extending from parietals to tail-tip; mid-dorsal stripe feeble, discontinuous, occupying 13th scalerow; lateral stripes occupying 5th-7th scalerows on either side; ventral colour variable, from creamy white to deep ochre orange, but always with three black stripes extending from preventrals to terminal subcaudal scale; midstripe formed by a small, one scale-large, black patch present in the middle of each ventral, that gives a striped appearance, as it is present in all consecutive ventrals; head and forebody scales with a pale yellow border, visible anteriorly, obscure to invisible posteriorly; last three rows of coastals bear a distinct black border, the posteriormost of last scalerow, intensely



bordered, thus demarcating the ventrals on the sides; iris fawn brown; pupil dark, small, rounded. Figure 2: Enhydris dussumierii in life (A) dorsal, (B) ventral views Colouration in preservative: Dorsum olivaceous to grayish brown; the stripes visible as in the live specimens, but of duller colour; ventrals pale, with a similar striped pattern; stripes dark grayish brown; iris dull brown; pupil less discernable. Natural history: During field visits in search for snakes, we observed this species to be docile and little defensive when dealt with. Fishermen who encountered this species informed us that some individuals bite if handled, causing mild swelling at the bite-site coupled with localized and intermittent throbbing pain. As is typical of this genus, during daytime, this species often takes refuge in marshy substratum of water-bodies, more so in stagnant ponds and nearby aquatic vegetation like wetland rushes (Ipomea) and water hyacinths (Eichhornia). Individuals have been observed to be out and active

during late evenings and night in inundated rice paddies (Oryza) and banana (Musa) groves. It often drops down and submerges from water-land interfaces at the sign of human-approach. Like most water snakes, it is more abundant during rainy season. Our experiences with the husbandry of captive snakes reveal that they feed on fishes such as Anabas sp., Catla sp., Channa sp., Labeo sp., Puntius sp. etc. Morphology of our individuals is slightly expanding the morphological characterization (Table 1), (Duméril et al., 1854; Smith, 1943; Gyi, 1970; Murphy, 2007; Kumar & Captain, 2011). Our observations on the natural history of this species are consistent with that of existing literature accounts (Parameshwaran, 1954; Kumar & Captain, 2011). Exhaustive accounts on its reproduction have been published by Parameshwaran (1954; 1963). Future field studies might result in a better understand its ecology and life history. Recent records further south of its type locality indicate the potential possibility of its occurrence in other parts of coastal Kerala and probably Kanyakumari District of Tamil Nadu. However, it is one of the many Enhydris species with a very narrow range of distribution. Figure 3: Distribution of Enhydris dussumierii

45

A

B

CHANDRAMOULI ET AL., 2012


Table 1: Comparison of selected characters of our ten individuals vs. literature data

Characters Smith (1943)

Sharma (2003)

Murphy (2007)

Kumar & Captain (2011) This work

Ventrals 144-150 143-150 144-148 147-150 142-151 Subcaudals 34-39 28-39 31-38 36-38 27-40 Supralabials (touching eye) 8(4) 8(4) 8(4) 8(4) 8-9(4-5) Infralabials (touching anterior genials) ? (5) ? (5) 12-13(5) No data 12-13(5-7)

Loreal 1 No data 1 1 1 Temporals 1+2 No data 1+3+3 1+2 1+2, 1+3 Max. snout-vent length (mm) 595 No data 670 565 795 Max. total length (mm) 670 670 744 655 920

Table 2: Distribution data summarizing recorded localities

Locality name District N Lat. E Long. Elevation (m a.s.l.) Literature / source

Cote de Malabar ? ca. 8-11 ca. 76-77 ? Duméril et al. (1854) Bengale (in error) ? ? ? ? Duméril et al. (1854)

North Travancore Ernakulam, Thrissur, Malappuram ca. 9-10 ca. 76 < 20 Parameshwaran (1954)

Cochin (= Kochi) Ernakulam 09.56 76.15 04 Murphy (2007) Kodungallur Thrissur 10.13 76.11 11 Murphy (2007)

Kothamangalam Ernakulam 10.03 76.37 22 Murphy (2007) Angamaly Ernakulam 10.12 76.22 19 Murphy (2007)

Aluva (=Alawye) Ernakulam 10.06 76.21 11 Murphy (2007) Chalakudy Thrissur 10.18 76.20 18 Murphy (2007)

Olavipe Ernakulam 09.29 76.19 09 Murphy (2007) Vellayani Thiruvananthapuram 08.25 76.59 08 Kumar & Captain (2011) Aakkulam Thiruvananthapuram 08.31 76.54 17 This work

Sreekaryam Thiruvananthapuram 08.32 76.55 46 This work Olathanni, Neyyttinkara Thiruvananthapuram 08.22 77.04 19 This work

Acknowledgements We thank our respective institutions for support and logistics; Abiram Shankar for logistic facilities at Thiruvananthapuram; Edward Garfred for French translation; Shreyas Krishnan and O. S. G. Pauwels for their comments; P. David, C. J. Murphy and H. K. Voris for details and photographs of the syntypes. Literature cited Boulenger, G. A., 1890. Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma; Reptilia and Batrachia. Taylor and Francis, London: 560. Daniel, J. C., 2002. The Book of Indian Reptiles and Amphibians. Oxford University Press, Mumbai, India: 238. Das, I., 2002. A Photographic Guide to Snakes and other Reptiles of India. New Holland publications, London, UK: 144.

Dowling, H. G., 1951. A proposed standard system of counting ventrals in snakes. British Journal of Herpetology, 1 (5): 97-99. Duméril, A, G. Bibron and E. Duméril, 1854. Erpétologie générale, ou Histoire naturelle compléte des reptiles. Paris, 7 (2): 953-955. Günther, A. C. L. G., 1864. The Reptiles of British India. The Ray Society, London: 550. Gyi, K. K., 1970. A Revision of Colubrid Snakes of the Subfamily Homalopsinae, Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas, Lawrence, No. 20: 223. Jan, G., 1868. Iconographie Genéralé des Ophidians. Milan: Kumar, A. B., A. Captain., 2011. Recent records of the endemic Kerala mud snake, Enhydris dussumierii (Duméril, Bibron & Duméril, 1854) from India. Current Science 100: 928-931.

46



Murphy, J. C., 2007, Homalopsid snakes-Evolution in the Mud. Krieger Publishing Co., U.S.A: 260. Parameswaran, K. N., 1954. On the viviparous habit of the fresh-water snake, Enhydris dussumieri (Smith). Current Science, 1: 27-28. Parameswaran, K. N. 1963. The foetal membranes and placentation of Enhydris dussumieri (Smith). Proceedings of Indian Academy of Sciences, Section-B, 56: 302-327. Sharma, R. C., 2003. Handbook – Indian Snakes. Director- Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata: 292. Smith, M. A., 1943. Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Vol- III Serpentes, Taylor and Francis publications, London: 583. Theobald, W. 1876. Descriptive Catalogue of the Reptiles of British India. Thacker Spink and Co., Calcutta, India: 238. Whitaker, R., A. Captain, 2004. Snakes of India – The Field Guide. Draco Books, Chengalpet, South India: 481.

47


Xenopeltis unicolor Boie, 1827 predation upon Sphenomorphus sp. Xenopeltis is a genus of non-venomous snakes characterized by its iridescent, highly polished scales which give to the species the common name “sunbeam snake”. Currently, two species are recognized (Bergman, 1955; McDiarmid et al., 1999; Rooij, 1917). Xenopeltis unicolor Boie, 1827 is found in Southeast Asia and some regions of Indonesia occupying a variety of habitats from primary to secondary forests, agricultural and settled areas from elevations up to 1402 m (Bergman, 1955; Das, 2010; McDiarmid et al., 1999; Rooij, 1917). Being nocturnal and subfossorial, this species inhabits burrows excavated by small mammals and crevices within limestones, spending large amounts of time underground on the leaf litter (Das, 2010; McDiarmid et al., 1999). Pre-maxillary teeth are found in the aglyphous dentition of X. unicolor (Dowling, 1959) enabling a varied diet that consists primarily of frogs, lizards (particularly skinks), small mammals (such as rodents), birds and even other snakes (Bergman, 1955; Das, 2010; McDiarmid et al., 1999; Rooij, 1917). Mertens (1943) described a first predation event in a captive specimen. The author recorded a predation upon a frog being eaten within few seconds. This snake used to be fed every week on a frog, lizard or mouse. In general, the prey was firmed right away being killed by suffocation, or sometimes as much as half an hour later. The frog was then swallowed quickly afterward. Despite being the most frequently traded species in some areas of Southeast Asia (such as U Minh Thuong National Park, Viet Nam) (Stuart, 2004), its ecology and natural history is still largely unknown (Das, 2004a). Approximately 130 species are currently assigned to the speciose genus Sphenomorphus of which 16 can be found in Borneo Island (Das, 2004b; Greer & Shea, 2004; Grismer, 2007). Species of this large group are

known to inhabit deep in forests, avoiding sun flecks. However, individuals can climb several meters up tree trunks to avoid predators or even some can seek safety in riparian microhabitats (Inger, 1959; Malkmus, 1991; Inger et al., 2001). Montane species tend to be more secretive in their habits which leave them poorly understood (Grismer, 2007). Sympatry is common, particularly in some areas of Borneo, where many species present overlapping distribution (Inger et al., 2001). In this manuscript we describe a predation event by an individual of Xenopeltis unicolor upon a Sphenomorphus species occurring at the Danum Valley. This report represents a more detailed item in this snake’s species diet in the wild as well as a new confirmed predator for these Bornean skinks. During research work carried out in Borneo Island, on 28 October 2009, an adult individual of X. unicolor (TL ±70cm), reddish brown dorsum with white cream ventre, was observed preying on Sphenomorphus sp. The predation episode was recorded at the Danum Valley Field Center (at 4º58’ N, 118º48’ E, 200 m a.s.l.) located on the eastern border of the Danum Valley Conservation Area on the east coast of the Malaysian state of Sabah, Borneo Island. Danum Valley Conservation Area is the largest remaining area of undisturbed lowland (<760m) evergreen forest, where dipterocarps consist of up to 80% of the canopy trees (Marsh & Greer, 1992; Newbery et al. 1992). The climate at Danum is equatorial with a mean annual temperature of 26.7 ºC and mean relative humidity between 78% and 95% (Marsh & Greer, 1992; Walsh, 1990). When the team approached the spot (at 10h16am, temp. 28ºC and humidity 80%), the Xenopeltis unicolor individual was hidden under a rotten log on the leaf litter, near a small stream. The skink was then observed a few seconds later getting closer to the crevice where the snake was lying, without noticing its presence. Suddenly, there was an ambush with the snake appearing under the rubble of the trunk and firmly seizing its prey by the head


Xenopeltis unicolor PREDATION UPON Sphenomorphus SP.


(at 10:20 hr). The Sphenomorphus sp. was immediately immobilized by a double wrap of the snake’s body while being secured by the enlarged maxillary teeth deeply embedded into the back of its head. In a closer view of the scene, it became visible that the skink was still alive, moving and struggling in an attempt to escape, for about 30 seconds, while the snake was biting and suffocating it. The Xenopeltis maintained its firm grasp for about 1 minute after capture, tightly restricting the

skink with its body. It started swallowing its prey from the head. As reported by Savitzky (1983), the teeth are flexibly mounted on the jaws to permit their hinging or rotation while swallowing (fig. 1.A-C) and so it took about 3 minutes until the tip of the skink tail was completely inside the snake’s mouth (at 10h25am). The behavior reported (killing and swallowing) lasted for about 5 minutes. After the predation, the snake returned to the gravel of the rotten log where it remained in its refuge (fig. 1.D).

Figure 1: Xenopeltis unicolor predating upon a Sphenomorphus sp. (A) Snake seizing and immobilising the skink; (B & C) snake swallowing its prey, starting from the head; (D) snake searching for its refugee under the log after eating the skink. (Photos: B. H. Martins) Taxonomic identification of Sphenomorphus group is very difficult (Greer & Shea, 2004) and, during our observation, it was not possible to note the critical diagnostic characters in order to be certain on the species. At the Danum Valley three Sphenomorphus species have been recorded: S. hallieri, S. multisquamatus and S. sabanus (Inger et al., 2001). However, we believe that the snake

doesn’t restrict its diet to a single species, especially when these skink species are so similar to one another in habits and in general form (e.g., Inger et al., 2001). Despite the increased research development in the Southeast Asia and the fact that perhaps the Danum Valley Field Centre is the leading forest research

MARTINS & ROSA, 2012


station in tropical Asia (e.g. Fayle et al., 2010; Inger et al., 2001; O'Malley, 2009), there is still the need for continuous studies for greater knowledge and to better understand this important ecosystem. In addition, over the last years, the continuous new discoveries of amphibians and reptiles indicates that the knowledge about the herpetofauna in Borneo is still scarce and therefore much remains to be learned in order to develop consistent conservation strategies (Das, 2004a; Grismer, 2007). Acknowledgements This observation was made during a Tropical Biology Association field course supported by the BAT Biodiversity Partnership Borneo Programme. The authors thank to the Royal Society South East Asian Rainforest Research Program and other staff of Danum Valley Field Centre for the support. Robert F. Inger for his valuable comments and insights on the species identification, M. M. Bahir and Christopher Durrant for reviewing the manuscript; finally to Lucília Tibério, Richard Gibson and Ivan Rehak.. Literature cited Bergman, R. A. M., 1955. The anatomy of Xenopeltis unicolor. Zoologische Mededelingen, 33 (22): 209-225. Das, I., 2004a. Collecting in the “land below the wind”, herpetological explorations of Borneo. Bonner zoologische Beiträge, 52 (3-4): 231-243. Das , I. 2004b. Lizards of Borneo. Natural History Publications, Kota Kinabalu, Borneo: 83. Das, I., 2010. A field guide to the reptiles of South-east Asia. New Holland Publishers, Ltd. London: 376. Dowling, H. G., 1959. Classification of the Serpentes. a critical review. Copeia, 1959 (1): 38-52. Fayle, T. M., L. Bakker, C. Cheah, T. M. Ching, A. Davey, F. Dem, A. Earl, Y. Huaimei, S. Hyland, B. Johansson, E. Ligtermoet, R. Lim, L. K. Lin, P. Luangyotha, B. H. Martins, A. F. Palmeirim, S. Paninhuan, S. K. Rojas, L. Sam, P. T. T. Sam, D. Susanto, A. Wahyudi, J. Walsh, S. Weigl, P. G. Craze, R. Jehle, D. Metcalfe and R. Trevelyan, 2010. A positive relationship between ant biodiversity (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of scavenger-mediated nutrient redistribution along a disturbance gradient in a south-east Asian rain forest. Myrmecological News, 14: 5-12.

Greer, A. E. and G. Shea, 2004. A new character within the taxonomically difficult Sphenomorphus group of lygosomine skinks, with a description of a new species from New Guinea. Journal of Herpetology, 38: 79-87. Grismer, L. L., 2007. A new species of small montane forest floor skink (Genus Sphenomorphus Fitzinger 1843) from southern peninsular Malaysia. Herpetologica, 63 (4): 544-551. Inger, R. F., 1959. Temperature responses and ecological relations of two Bornean lizards. Ecology, 40 (1): 127-136. Inger, R. F., T. F. Lian, M. Lakim and P. Yambun, 2001. New species of the lizard genus Sphenomorphus, (Lacertilia: Scincidae), with notes on ecological and geographic distribution of species in Sabah, Malaysia. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology, 49 (2): 181-189. Malkmus, R., 1991. Sphenomorphus aquaticus sp. n. (Sauria: Scincidae) vom Mount Kinabalu/Nord-Borneo. Sauria, 13: 23-28. Marsh, C. W. and A. G. Greer, 1992. Forest land-use in Sabah, Malaysia: An introduction to Danum Valley. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 335(1275): 331-339. Mertens, R., 1943. Systematische und ökologische Bemerkungen über die Regenbogenschlange, Xenopeltis unicolor Reinwardt. Der Zoologische Garten (N.F.), 15: 213-220. McDiarmid, R. W., J. A. Campbell and T. Touré, 1999. Snake species of the World: a taxonomic and geographic reference, vol. 1. Herpetologists' League. Washington: 511. Newbery, D. McC., E. J. F. Campbell, Y. F. Lee, C. E. Ridsdale and M. J. Still, 1992. Primary lowland dipterocarp forest at Danum Valley, Sabah, Malaysia: structure, relative abundance and family composition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 335 (1275): 341-356. O'Malley, K., 2009. Patterns of abundance and diversity in epiphytic orchids on Parashorea malaanonan trees in Danum Valley, Sabah. The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2 (2): 38-58. Rooij, N. D., 1917. The reptiles of the Indo-Australian archipelago, vol. II. Ophidia. Leiden: E.J. Brill, Holland: 334.

Xenopeltis unicolor PREDATION UPON Sphenomorphus SP.


Savitzky, A. H., 1983. Coadapted character complexe among snakes: fossoriality, piscivory, durophagy. American Zoologist, 23 (2): 397-409. Stuart, B. L., 2004. The harvest and trade of reptiles at U Minh Thuong National Park, southern Viet Nam. TRAFFIC Bulletin, 20 (1): 25-34. Walsh, R. P. D., 1990. Climatic data for Danum Valley. Unpublished Danum Valley Field Centre Report No. 98. Sabah, East Malaysia:

Submitted: 11 April 2012, Accepted: 13 April 2012 Sectional Editor: Gernot Vogel

Bruno H. Martins1 & Gonçalo M. Rosa2,3

1 CIBIO - Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Porto,

Portugal

2 Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, School of Anthropology and Conservation,

University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NR, UK

3 Centro de Biologia Ambiental,

Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Bloco C2, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa,

Portugal E-mail: [email protected]

51


First record of the blue sea slug (Glaucus atlanticus) from Andhra Pradesh – India The blue sea slug Glaucus atlanticus Forster, 1777 (Gastropoda, Glaucidae) is a nudibranch that occurs in temperate and tropical oceans throughout the world. It is characterized by a silvery white dorsal surface and dark blue ventral surface. The body is elongate measuring up to 3 cm and is flattened. The head is small and blunt with a pair of small oral tentacles near the mouth. The cerata or papillae are wing-like and extend laterally from three distinct pairs of peduncles. The papillae are placed in a single row (uniseriate) and may be 84 in total (Forster, 1777). A similar looking glaucid nudibranch, Glaucus marginata (Bergh, 1860), is a bluish-brown nudibranch with bluish underside, and differs from Glaucus atlanticus in bearing four pairs of clusters of papillae that are arranged in more than one row (multiseriate) and may be 139 or more in number (Bergh, 1860). The latter species has been included by some authorities under the genus Glaucilla Bergh, 1860. Presently, both species are listed under Glaucus Poli, 1795 (Burn, 2006; Gofas et al., 2001). Glaucus atlanticus is rarely seen on shore as it is pelagic except during periods of on-shore winds when they can be found floating in coastal waters and sometimes washed on to beaches. They float partially by means of an air bubble that they have swallowed and stored in their gastric cavity and are able to move toward prey or mates by using their cerata to make slow swimming movements. They eat a variety of drifting prey including the siphonophore Physalia utriculus (Portuguese man-o-war) as well as the chondrophores Velella velella and Porpita pacifica (Bayer, 1963; Lalli & Gilmer, 1989; Thompson & Bennett, 1969, 1970). In a recent field survey along the coast of Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh, India, we observed washed up specimens of Glaucus atlanticus. No vouchers have been collected, but the

photo vouchers (NHM.OU.MOLL.PV.1-2012 & NHM.OU.MOLL.PV.2-2012) (Fig. 1) have been deposited at the Natural History Museum of the Osmania University, Hyderabad, India. Figure 1: Glaucus atlanticus from Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India This species has been reported from many places (Thompson & McFarlane, 2008) in tropical and temperate regions, mostly encountered as washed-up specimens and sometimes in the seas from 31 marine ecoregions of ten marine realms: Southern Vietnam, Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands (Central Indo-Pacific); Southern Cook/Austral Islands, Hawaii (Eastern Indo-Pacific); Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Eastern India, South India & Sri Lanka, Gulf of Aden, East African Coral Coast, Seychelles, Western & Northern Madagascar (Western Indo-Pacific); Nicoya, Northern Galapagos Island,


FIRST RECORD OF BLUE SEA SLUG FROM ANDHRA PRADESH – INDIA


Eastern Galapagos Island (Tropical Eastern Pacific); Central Kurushio Current (Temperate Northern Pacific); Tweed-Moreton, Manning-Hawkesbury, Cape Howe, Northeastern New Zealand (Temperate Australasia); Bermuda, Florida, Southern Gulf of Mexico (Tropical Atlantic); Western Mediterranean, Azores Canaries Madeira, Virginia, North Carolina, Northern Gulf of Mexico (Temperate Northern Atlantic); Uruguay - Buenos Aires Shelf (Temperate South America); Natal, Agulhas Bank, Namaqua (Temperate Southern Africa). In Indian seas, Glaucus atlanticus has previously been documented from Bay of Bengal and off the coast of Nagapattinam, Tamil Nadu, India (GBIF, 2012; Kamalakannan et al., 2010). The presence of the species further north along the coast of Andhra Pradesh reveals that the populations of this species may have moved further in to the Bay of Bengal with more possibilities of the species moving further north of Andhra Pradesh. Acknowledgements We thank the Head of the Department of Zoology, Osmania University, Hyderabad for providing necessary facilities, Department of Biotechnology (Government of India), and University Grants Commission (Government of India) in New Delhi for research grants, C. Aditya Srinivasulu for mapping the species. Literature cited Bayer, F. M., 1963. Observations on pelagic mollusks associated with the siphonophores Velella and Physalia. Bulletin of Marine Science of the Gulf & Caribbean, 13: 454-466. Bergh, L. S. R., 1860. Om Forekomsten af Neldefiim hos Mollusker. Vidensk. Meddel. Naturh. Foren. Kjöbenhavn: 309-331+pl.8. Burn R., 2006. A checklist and bibliography of the Opisthobranchia (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of Victoria and the Bass Strait area, south-eastern Australia. Museum Victoria Science Reports, 10: 1-42. Forster, G., 1777. A voyage round the world in His Britannic Majesty's sloop, Resolution, commanded by Capt. James Cook, during the years 1772, 3, 4, and 5 by George Forster. Vol. 1: 49.

Gofas, S., J. Le Renard and P. Bouchet, 2001. Mollusca. In: Costello, M. J. et al. (ed.) (2001). European register of marine species: a check-list of the marine species in Europe and a bibliography of guides to their identification. Collection Patrimoines Naturels, 50: 180-213. GBIF, 2012. Biodiversity occurrence data published by Indian Ocean Node of OBIS (Accessed through GBIF Data Portal, data.gbif.org, 2012-02-29). Kamalakannan, K., S. Kumaran, S. Balakrishnan, C. Thenmozhi, P. Sampathkumar and T. Balasubramanian, 2010. Occurrence of Glaucus atlanticus and Glaucus marginata (Blue Ocean Slug) from Nagapattinam coastal waters, South east coast of India. International Journal of Current Research, 5: 71-73. Lalli C. M. and R. W. Gilmer, 1989. Pelagic snails: the biology of holoplanktonic gastropod mollusks. Stanford University Press, California: 259. Thompson, T. E. and I. Bennett, 1969. Physalia nematocysts: Utilised by mollusks for defense. Science, 166: 1532-1533. Thompson, T. E. and I. Bennett, 1970. Observations on Australian Glaucidae (Mollusca: Opisthobranchia). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society of London, 49: 187-197. Thompson, T. E. and I. D. McFarlane, 2008. Observations on a collection of Glaucus from the Gulf of Aden with a critical review of published records of Glaucidae (Gastropoda, Opisthobranchia). Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London, 178 (2): 107-123.

Submitted: 07 March 2012, Accepted: 16 March 2012

Sectional Editor: Brenden Holland Bhargavi Srinivasulu1,2, C. Srinivasulu1 and G. Chethan Kumar1 1 Wildlife Biology Section, Department of Zoology, University College of Science, Osmania University,

Hyderabad 500007, India 2 E-mail: [email protected]


Three tick species parasitizing a rock python in Sri Lanka Parasitism is a relationship where one of the parties (the parasite) either harms its host or lives at the expense of it (Roberts & Javovy, 2000). Host parasite interactions are important driving forces in population dynamics and even extinction (Pedersen et al., 2007). These interactions are also indicators of ecosystem health (Marcogliese, 2005) and they are important in stabilizing food webs (Lafferty et al., 2008). A parasite may cause mechanical injury, stimulate a damaging inflammatory or immune response, or simply rob the host of nutrition (Poulin & Brodeur, 1994). However in the wild most parasites must live in harmony with their hosts. If the parasites kill the host, they themselves would ultimately die without shelter and nutrition (Roger & Kilingenberg, 1993). Reptiles become hosts to a number of parasitic organisms ranging from protozoans to arthropods (Fredric, 1991; Thomas & Douglas, 1996). Among these, ticks (hard and soft) are the most common arthropod group that parasitizes reptiles (Roger & Kilingenberg, 1993). There are at least seven genera of ticks known to use reptile hosts: Amblyomma, Aponomma, Argas, Hyalomma, Haemaphysalia, Ixodes and Ornithodoras (Arthur, 1962). All Argas and Ornithodoros are hard ticks. Here, we report a new observation of three tick species found on the skin of the rock python in the wild. We observed an adult female rock python (Python molurus) (SVL, 168 cm) was located under a wood apple tree, Feronia limonia (Family: Rutaceae) at the Wildlife training center, Randenigala, Sri Lanka, on October 30 2010. The female had recently ingested a large prey (approximately the size of 50 cm) causing the skin of the python to expand allowing us to observe a heavy tick infection. The expanding skin exposed spaces between scales providing an area for a large number of ticks to reside. It was well visible that there were 6 morphologically distinct ticks were initially identified. Some of the ticks were about 10

mm in length due to their ingestion of blood. Others were clinging on to the python’s skin in clusters just beneath the blood fed ticks. After thorough observation, all the ticks were removed carefully making sure that no damage was caused to the host or the parasites. A total of 165 ticks were collected and identified to the species level. We found that the ticks included both male and female ecto-parasitic ticks (Ixoidia) and belonged to one of three species (Fig. 1); Aponomma gervaisi, Aponomma varanense and Ambyolomma clypeolatum. The most abundant species was Aponomma varanense (n=108) while Ambyolomma clypeolatum (n=8) was the least abundant. Aponomma gervaisi was first reported from Sri Lanka by Neumann (1918) and later has been reportedly found on various host species in captivity (Python molurus: Fernando & Randeniya, 2009; Seneviratne, 1965; Warburton, 1925; Varanus bengalensis: Sharif, 1928; Daboia russelii: Seneviratne, 1965; Naja naja: Fernando & Randeniya, 2009). This is the first record of A. gervaisi found on a wild rock python. Sharif (1928) and Seneviratne (1965) reported Aponomma varanense ticks collected off on the land monitor (Varanus bengalensis). Fernando & Randeniya (2009) reported Aponomma varanense collected off rock pythons and cobra in captivity. This is the first record of Aponomma varanense found on wild rock python. Warburton (1925), Robinson (1926), Seneviratne (1965) and Fernando & Randeniya (2009) recorded Ambyolomma clypeolatum was collected off a star tortoise (Geochelone elegans) in captivity and this is a new host record of Ambyolomma clypeolatum on rock python from Sri Lanka. This observation shows multiple tick infection in wild rock python in Sri Lanka. Proper scientific studies have not been done to show that parasitic infections lead to the decline of reptile population in Sri Lanka. Therefore this observation suggests a need for further studies on reptile population decline in Sri Lanka.


THREE TICK SPECIES PARASITIZING A ROCK PYTHON IN SRI LANKA


Figure 1: Different tick species found in the Rock Python (Python molurus) from Randenigala, Sri Lanka, dorsal view of (A) Aponomma gervaisi female (x14); (B) Aponomma gervaisi male (x14); (C) Aponomma varanense female (x14); (D) Aponomma varanense male (x14); (E) Ambyolomma clypeolatum female (x10); (F) Ambyolomma clypeolatum male (x10); (G) Aponomma gervaisi attachment on the skin (x0.2); (H) Aponomma gervaisi blood fed female (x10).

FERNANDO & FERNANDO, 2012


Acknowledgements We are grateful to Prof. Nixon Wilson, University of Northern Iowa, USA for the identification of tick species and his valuable comments. Finally we would like to thank Laura Johnson (Dalhousie University, Canada) and Jan Gogarten (McGill University, Canada) for reviewing the manuscript. Literature cited Arthur, D.R., 1962. Ticks and disease. International series of monographs on pure and applied biology. New York, Pergamum press. Fernando, T. S. P. & P. V. Randeniya, 2009. Ecto Parasites and intestinal parasites of some selected reptile species in National Zoological Gardens, Sri Lanka. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife diseases, 40 (2): 272-275. Fredric, L. F. 1991. Applied clinical nonhemic Parasitology of reptiles, Malabar, Florida. Lafferty, K. D., S. Allesina, M. Arim, C. J. Briggs, G. De Leo, A. P. Dobson, J. A. Dunne, P. T. J. Johnson, A. M. Kuris, D. J. Marcogliese, N. D. Martinez, J. Memmott, P. A. Marquet, J. P. McLaughlin, E. A. Mordecai, M. Pascual, R. Poulin, D. W. Thieltges, 2008. Parasites in food webs: the ultimate missing links. Ecology Letters, 11:533–546 Marcogliese, D. J. 2005. Parasites of the superorganism: are they indicators of ecosystem health?. International Journal of Parasitology, 35: 705-716. Neumann, L. G., 1918. Notes sur les ixodidés III, Archives de Parasitologie, 9: 225-241. Pedersen A. B., K. E. Jones, C. Nunn and S. Altizer. 2007. Infectious diseases and extinction risk in wild mammals. Conservation Biology, 21: 1269-1279. Poulin, R. and J. Brodeur, 1994. Parasitic manipulation of host behavior: should host always lost?. Oikos, 70 (3) 479-484. Roberts, L. S. and J. Javovy, 2000. Foundation of Parasitology. McGrew Hill Publications, USA. Robinson, L. E., 1926. The genus Amblyomma in ticks: A monograph of the Ixodoidea. Cambridge University press: 302. Roger, J. and D. V. M. Kilingenberg, 1993. Understanding reptile parasites. Herpetocultural library: 44-45.

Senevirantna, P., 1965. The ticks (Ixodoidea) of Ceylon. Ceylon veterinary Journal, 13(2): 30-41. Sharif, M., 1928. A revision of the Indian Ixodidae, with special reference to the collection in the Indian museum. Research Indian museum, 30: 217-344. Thomas, J. L., R. M. Douglas, 1996. Reptile Medicine and Surgery. In: Parasitology (Section II, chapter 16): 185-203. Warburton, C., 1925. Report of the Ixodidae of the Colombo museum. Spolia zeylanica, 13: 255-256.

Submitted: 16 December 2011, Accepted: 30 April 2012

Sectional Editor: Colin A. Chapman

T. S. P. Fernando1 and H. K. A. V. A. Kulasena Fernando2

1Dept. of Zoology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, The Open University of Sri Lanka, Nawala,

Sri Lanka. E-mail: [email protected]

2Clinical trials unit, Faculty of Medicine,

University of Kelaniya, Ragama Sri Lanka.

E-mail: [email protected]

56


The advertisement call of Kandyan shrub frog (Pseudophilautus rus) The Kandyan Shrub Frog, Pseudophilautus rus (Manamendra-Arachchi & Pethiyagoda, 2005) (Fig. 1) is known only from two localities around Kandy (500–800 m a.s.l), Sri Lanka; Kiribathkumbura and Pilimatalawa. Mature males attain a SVL of 20.6–24.1 mm and mature females up to 23.1 mm (Manamendra-Arachchi & Pethiyagoda, 2005). P. rus perches on low vegetation, usually on leaves and branches of shrubs, grass, and logs, 0.1–1.5 m above the ground. Males of the species produce one of the most frequently heard calls in suburban and urban areas in Kandy, together with the common shrub frog P. popularis. Here, I describe for the first time the advertisement call of P. rus. Figure 1: Pseudophilautus rus in Nawalapitiya The vocalizations of P.rus were studied under natural conditions in two locations in the Kandy district; Peradeniya (7° 15’ 29.00” N, 80° 36’ 01.00” E; alt. 504 m a.s.l) and Nawalapitiya (7° 02’ 42.01” N, 80° 32’ 15.43” E; alt. 630 m a.s.l). Advertisement calls were recorded during the months of June and July 2011, using Creative ZEN®Mozaic EZ (wave format). Advertisement calls were recorded from animals vocalizing alone to avoid alteration of advertisement calls (Bee & Bowling, 2002), and recordings were made at a distance of 0.5 m. Animals were not captured for

measurements to avoid disturbance as the frogs were also part of a behavioural study. Ambient temperature was measured using a Brannon mercury thermometer (-20–100 °C, ± 0.5 °C). Recordings were made at 25–28 °C air temperature. The following software was used for sound analysis: Windows movie maker (Vista), Syrinx 1.0.0.1 and Wavesurfer 1.8.8. All calls were edited with a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz and 16 bits per sample in the mono pattern. The audio spectrogram was constructed using Wavesurfer 1.8.8 software with Fast Fourier Transformation: width 512 points, bandwidth of 86.132 Hz using Blackman window. A total of 77 calls produced by seven males (9-11 calls per individual) were included in the analysis. Temporal and Spectral parameters were analyzed as explained in Samarasinghe (2011). The temporal parameters measured were duration of one call (DC) and intercall interval (IC). The number of prominent pulses in a note (NP) and the pulse rate (PR) were also recorded. The spectral parameters measured were lower frequency (F1), upper frequency (F2) and peak frequency (F3). Numerical call parameters are given as range followed by mean + SD in parenthesis. Pseudophilautus rus was found to begin vocalizing around 18:00 h and end around 06:30 h. In Peradeniya, this species was found perched on low vegetation, usually on the leaves and branches of shrubs, grass, and logs, at 0.1–1.5 m above the ground. In Nawalapitiya, P. rus was found in sympatry mainly with P. folicola and P. popularis. In Nawalapitiya, P. rus was found calling from microhabitats such as dry leaves of ferns, deep crevices of short tree trunks and short shrubs found on either side of foot paths 0.3–2 m above ground level. The advertisement call was the most common call emitted by P. rus, consisted of a short, multi-pulsed note. This note is amplitude modulated, with amplitude decreasing over time. The DC ranged between 27–36 ms (31.78 ± 1.178 ms, n = 77), and the IC was 4.29–10.36 s (6.02 ±1.428 s, n = 39). Each call consisted of 4–10 (6.31 ± 1.18, n = 77) prominent pulses and the pulse rate ranged from 129.03–312.50 s-1 (198.37 ± 34.56 s-1, n = 77). F1


THE ADVERTISEMENT CALL OF PSEUDOPHILAUTUS RUS


ranged from 1.6–2.0 kHz (n = 77), F2 ranged between 3.3–3.8 kHz (n = 77) and F3 was 2.4–3.2 kHz (n = 77). Figure 2: (A) spectrogram, (B) waveform, and (C) power spectrum of the advertisement call of Pseudophilautus rus, recorded at 25.5 ° C. Acknowledgements I am very grateful for Imesh Nuwan Bandara (YES) and Dushantha Kandambi for their support given in the field and for providing hospitality during the field visits. My gratitude also goes for Mahesh Chathuranga for his help with graphics. Literature Cited: Bee, M. A. and A. C., Bowling, 2002. Socially-mediated pitch alteration by territorial male bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana. Journal of Herpetology, 36, 140–143. Manamendra-Arachchi, K. and R. Pethiyagoda, 2005. The Sri Lankan shrub frogs of the genus Philautus Gistel, 1848 (Ranidae: Rhacophorinae), with description of 27 new species. In: Yeo, C. J., Ng, P. K. L. & Pethiyagoda, R. (Eds.), Contributions to biodiversity exploration and research in Sri Lanka. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology, Supplement 12, 163–303. Samarasinghe, D. J. S., 2011. Description of the complex advertisement call of Pseudophilautus popularis (Manamendra-Arachchi & Pethiyagoda, 2005) (Amphibia: Rhacophoridae). Zootaxa, 3002, 62–64.

Submitted: 09 May 2012, Accepted: 15 May 2012 Sectional Editor: Jodi Rowley

Dinal J. S. Samarasinghe

The Young Zoologists’ Association of Sri Lanka, National Zoological Gardens, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka

E-mail: [email protected]

A

B

C


First record of the dollarbird (Eurystomus orientalis) from Colombo District, Sri Lanka The Dollarbird, Eurystomus orientalis is one of the rarest (Harrison & Worfolk, 1999) and endangered (IUCNSL & MENR, 2007) bird in Sri Lanka. During a pilgrimage to Ambulgala Rajamaha Viharaya on 6 July 2009, one individual of dollarbird (see the cover page of this journal) was sighted at Ambulgala (6° 54’ 20.98” N, 80° 03’ 03.01” E) between Hanwella and Ranala around 17:20 h. The dollarbird perched on a branch of a Jack tree (Artocarpus heterophyllus) around 10 m from ground level. During 40 minutes the bird flew away two times and came back and perched on the same tree. The villagers reported that the bird has been roosting on the same tree for past two months. Dollarbirds have been previously reported from many locations (Fig. 1) (Henry, 1998; Kotagama & Wijayasinha, 1998; Legge, 1880; Rasmussen & Anderton, 2005; Seneratne, 1998), but this is the first record from Colombo District, which is 40 km away from the nearest previous record from Kalutara District, Sri Lanka. Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank L. E. Harding, S. Maduranga, D. Wakagoda, U. Hettige and N. Karunarathna for valuable comments. Literature cited Harrison, J. and T. Worfolk, 1999. A Field Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka. Oxford University Press Inc, New York, USA: 219. Henry, G. M., 1998. A Guide to the Birds of Sri Lanka. Hoffmann, T.W., D. Warakagoda and U. Ekanayake, (Eds.) Oxford University Press, New Delhi: 488. IUCNSL and MENR, 2007. The 2007 National Red List of Threatened Fauna and Flora of Sri Lanka. Colombo, Sri Lanka: 148. Kotagama, S. and A. Wijayasinha, 1998. Siri Laka Kurullo “Birds of Sri Lanka” (text in Sinhala). Wildlife Heritage Trust of Sri Lanka, Colombo: 394.

Kotagama, S. W., R. I. De Silva, A. S. Wijayasinha and V. Abeygunawardena, 2006. Avifaunal list of Sri Lanka. In: Bambaradeniya, C. N. B (ed.), Fauna of Sri Lanka: Status of Taxonomy, Research and Conservation. IUCN Sri Lanka: 164-203. Legge, W. V. 1880. A history of the birds of Ceylon. (Reprint), Thisara Prakashakayo, Dehiwala: 638. Rasmussen, P. C. and J. C. Anderton, 2005. Birds of South Asia: The Ripley Guide - Vols. 1 & 2. Smithsonian: 378 & 683. Seneratna, C. V. 1998. A sight record of Broad-Billed Roller (Dollarbird) Eurystomus orientalis from Trincomalee. Sri Lanka Naturalist, 2 (4): 43-44. Figure 1: Distribution of the Dollarbird (blue= current record; red= previous records). D. M. S. S. Karunarathna1,3, N. Hapuarachchi2,

D. H. P. U de Silva1, A. Kumarasinghe1, U. T. I. Abeyawardene1 and M. Madawala1

1 Young Zoologists’ Association, Department of

National Zoological Gardens, Sri Lanka E-mail: [email protected] 3

2 Wildlife Conservation Society, Galle, Sri Lanka

TAPROBANICA, ISSN 1800-427X. April, 2012. Vol. 04, No. 01: pp. 59. © Taprobanica Private Limited, Jl. Kuricang 18 Gd.9 No.47, Ciputat 15412, Tangerang, Indonesia.

Documents

Taprobanica (2012) Vol. 4. No. 1. Pages 01-59