Reptile rap 14 june 2012

Reptile Rap Newsletter of the South Asian Reptile Network

No.14 | June 2012

ISSN 2230-7079

Date of publication: 04 June 2012

Contents The conservation of Indian reptiles: an approach with molecular aspects -- V.M. Sathish Kumar, Pp. 2–8 Records of Indian Egg Eater Snake Elachistodon westermanni in the localities of Shegaon, District Buldhana, Maharashtra, India -- Abhishek Narayanan, Pp. 9–12 An observation on death of Python Python molurus feeding on a male Spotted Deer Cervus axis -- Mohnish Kapoor, Pp. 13–14 Herpetofauna of the Vidyanagari campus of the University of Mumbai, Maharashtra -- Madhav V. Upadhye, Vinayak V. Puranik, Prasad Dabholkar & Ujwala Jadhav, Pp. 15–20

Herpetofaunal diversity in and around the selected man-made wetlands of central and northern Gujarat, India -- Raju Vyas, B.M. Parasharya & J.J. Jani, Pp. 21–26 A Malabar Pit Viper, Trimeresurus malabaricus (Jerdon, 1854) morph from the southern Western Ghats -- Arun Kanagavel, Rajkumar Sekar, Nikhil Whitaker & Rajeev Raghavan, Pp. 27–28 Sightings of King Cobra Ophiophagus hannah in northern coastal Andhra Pradesh -- K.L.N. Murthy & K.V. Ramana Murthy, Pp. 29–32 First record of Slender Coral Snake Calliophis melanurus (Shaw, 1802) south of the Palghat Gap, Western Ghats -- G. Shine & P.O. Nameer, Pp. 33–35 UGC Sponsored Major Research Project on Herpetofauna, P. 36

www.zoosprint.org/Newsletters/ReptileRap.htm

OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD

1

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

The conservation of Indian reptiles: an approach with molecular aspects V.M. Sathish Kumar Southern Regional Centre, 130 Santhome High Road, Zoological Survey of India, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600028, India Email: drsathishkumarvm@gmail.com

Taxonomy and Conservation India’s colossal biological diversity can be credited to the vast array of ecological habitats ranging from tropical, sub-tropical, temperate, alpine to desert. According to the World Biodiversity Classification, India represents two biodiversity hotspots (Western Ghats and northeastern India) and has the richest vertebrate fauna in Asia.

According to Ramakrishana & Alfred (2006), the reptile fauna of India consists of about 460 species; with 244 snakes, 178 lizards, three crocodiles, and 35 turtles. Among these, 33 are considered threatened.

Das (2003) reported 506 species within the political boundaries of the Republic of India. Aengals et al. (2011) accounted 518 species of reptiles which includes 3 species of crocodiles, 34 species of turtles and tortoises, 202 species of lizards and 279 species of snakes belonging to 28 families.

Molur & Walker (1998) accounted about 95 endemic reptile taxa in the Western Ghats of which 62 are reported as vulnerable.

However, the information on Indian reptiles is still introductory

as alpha taxonomy with the conventional outlook is yet to absorb the modern molecular trends in systematics and conservation. A large number of Institutions and Museums in the country suffer from lack of funding resources to pursue various molecular researches and many of the species predicted to be taxonomically enigmatic, or similar to known species are still awaiting formal detection using modern techniques.

The Zoological Survey of India, the premier institution, has played an important role in promoting animal systematics in the country.

But the National Zoological Collection housed at the Zoological Survey of India which holds the largest reptile collections in the country dates back to the early part of the 19th century; has yet to be fully entered into electronic databases. The Indian Wildlife Protection Act (1972) that legally denies permission to export any biological sample materials outside India also hinders the research activities of other developed countries on Indian reptile groups.

Moreover, most species are known from very few localities and from few adults; a situation that impedes both traditional taxonomic advancement 2

and conservation efforts.

In addition, the genetic information required for extensive systematic revisions for most genera is lacking.

The introduction of “New Systematics” by Huxley (1940) and Mayr (1942) made/helped zoologists realise the importance of other characters to supplement the morphological characters for precise identification.

This is very significant for the identification of unknown biological material when using a combination of evidences (morphology, behaviour, molecules, etc.) instead of relying on onedimensional taxonomy (Bond & Sierwald 2003; Seberg et al. 2003; Lee 2004; Will & Rubinoff 2004).

Several recent studies have applied mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) markers in phylogeographic studies to geographically widespread taxa to determine distinctive and unrecognized evolutionary lineages (e.g., Avise et al. 1992; Zamudio et al. 1997). Also, elucidation of phylogenetic relationships among closely-related taxa is critical to correctly infer a taxon (e.g. Arnold 1993; Harvey et al. 1996; Roderick & Gillespie 1998).

Taxonomic studies by means of molecular techniques have contributed significantly to our perceptive of lineages contained by species or species groups. They have endorsed for revisions of taxonomically difficult groups, often re­vealing unrecognized taxa and smoothened the

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 progress of recognition of isolated or distinctive lineages.

Molecular systematics through PCR amplification and sequencing makes the use of various molecular techniques: such as allozyme, isozyme, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) to provide information on the ge­ netics of wide-ranging species or species groups in isolated habitat. Therefore, molecular techniques are crucial for studies in phylogeography, because it is “the field of study concerned with the principles and processes of genealogical lineages, especially those within and among closelyrelated species� as stated by Avise (2000). Such studies can be carried out with Indian lizard families Gekkonidae and Lacertidae as its exact phylogeny has not fully been established yet. Also, with mtDNA sequence, data, we can investigate the systematic relationships within genera or species by using the rapidly evolving control region of the mitochondrial genome.

Because it has proven reliable in resolving intraspecific variation in many vertebrates including turtles (Stewart & Baker 1994; Encalada et al.

1996; Shaffer & McKnight 1996), accurately identifies closely related emydid turtle species (Lamb et al. 1994).

Besides, animal genome data with potentially endless supply of evolutionary and systematic information can obviously be used to infer species diagnosis, description and identification.

Consequently, the taxonomy of most organisms is better

worked out for taxa occurring in Europe and America than the tropics. Therefore, some of the current names for tropical taxa could be the first approximation to a complex biological reality.

The sampling of subspecies within a species does not promise the sampling of significant variation.

Phylogenetic studies of congeneric species should therefore be shared with phylogeographic surveys of haplotype dissimilarity, so that the monophyly of populations of a putative species with respect to others can be tested.

As stated by Ball & Avise (1992), the discussion about the levels of intraspecific or interspecific variation necessary to distinguish species and subspecies limits has received considerable notice in the last several decades.

Several current studies that have discussed the border line among inter and intraspecific variation have utilised molecular information, mostly to test existing hypotheses of species-level relationships and boundaries.

At the same time, a number of formerly documented subspecies genetically match though morphologically they overlap, implying that they probably should not be recognized at any taxonomic level. Parallel work on the snake Pituophis melanoleucus points that the conventional outlook suggested by Conant (1956) for the single polytypic species is conflicting with the molecular evidence, and 3

Painted Turtles Chrysemys picta present an additional outstanding prospect to explore the question of species boundaries within a widespread species complex. According to Bishop & Schmidt (1931), the genus Chrysemys as currently recognized contains a single extant species, C. picta.

Four subspecies are generally recognized: Chrysemys picta bellii, C.p. dorsalis, C.p. marginata, and C.p. picta. Thus, decisions regarding species and subspecies boundaries can, and do have dramatic impacts on species conservation and management (Shaffer et al.

2000).

After almost three centuries of herpetological work in India, a good number of research papers have been published. Though, the main comprehensive works would indisputably have been by Malcolm A. Smith, and there is no wonder that it took more than twelve years for him to produce these three separate volumes on Indian reptiles.

Smith (1931) systematically placed the crocodiles and turtles in Volume I, the lizards in Volume II (1935), and the snakes in Volume III (1943).

These precious classics have long been regarded as fundamental references in the library of any herpetologist interested in Indian regions.

Further contributions were made by Tiwari & Biswas (1973), Sharma (1977, 1978, 1981, 1998, 2002, 2007), Murthy (1985, 1994, 2010), Das (1991, 1994, 1996, 1997

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 a&b, 2003), Tikedar & Sharma (1992), Das & Bauer (2000), Das & Sengupta (2000), Daniel (2002), Whitaker & Captain (2004), Gower & Winkler (2007), ManamendraArachchi et al.

(2007), Mukherjee and Bhupathy (2007), Sharma (2007), Thorpe et. al. (2007), Giri (2008), Giri & Bauer (2008), Das & Vijayakumar (2009), Giri et al. (2009a), Giri et al. (2009b), Mahony (2009, 2010), Pook et al. (2009), van Rooijen & Vogel (2009), Zambre et al. (2009), Haralu (2010) and Venugopal (2010).

Today, about 518 species of reptiles which includes three species of crocodiles, 34 species of turtles and tortoises, 202 species of lizards and 279 species of snakes belonging to 28 families (Aengals et al.

2011) are found in India. The poorly resolved taxonomies among some families (e.g.

Uropeltidae, Agamidae) has created some confusion in Indian reptile taxonomy than in other vertebrates of the more complex groups and numerous new species sit in laboratories/collection halls awaiting more detailed studies based on genetic data. The recent taxonomic revisions have elevated the number of endemic uropeltid species to 47 (based on morphology). For instance, David (2003) stated that the taxonomy of uropeltids is unstable and is likely to be substantially revised in future.

For such groups, interspecific hybridisation could be very common.

Therefore,

very apparent as they are terrestrial. Forest species are more vulnerable due to their lack of ability to resist the high temper­atures of open formations.

Most common and widely distributed species are more resistant, but many will disappear when their habitats are totally eliminated.

Moreover, people fear or dislike snakes; they tend to be killed whenever they are seen.

Crocodiles and turtles are hunted for their meat and eggs.

Construction of hydroelectric dams alters the entire habitat in the area of the reservoir, thus should be treated as a real local threat.

Even as animals run away, large numbers are rescued and dumped in nearby forests, even though the impacts on the ecology and biology of the nearby populations are mostly unknown as stated by Pavan (2002). Dams are likely to cause huge potential impacts on the reproductive bi­ology of the turtle and crocodile populations downstream and on the population formation of lizards and snakes even though these impacts may not be instantly evident.

The smaller forest reptiles are very vulnerable to mi­ croclimate changes.

Agro­ chemicals are another major threat and may be especially serious in small protected areas surrounded by agricul­ tural land.

The long-term Principal threats effects of these threats need Habitat alteration is the to be understood in order to major threat. The impacts delineate appropriate conser­ on lizards and snakes are vation strategies. Therefore, according to biological species concept, the whole group is to be placed and treated under a complex species.

Since many subspecies are not distinct species, they are reproductively compatible and will periodically interbreed with adjacent subspecies. These breeds pose several problems to the evolutionary zoologist and could be misidentified as a new species adding up to more confusion. This could be because the zoologists confined their studies mainly to the morphological characters, ignoring the detailed analysis of the interspecific and intergeneric breeds and most of their descriptions were based on single “type” specimens.

Members of a subspecies share a unique geographical range or habitat, a group of recognizable genetically controlled characteristics, morphological or molecular, and a unique natural history as compared to other subspecies.

Accordingly, those who adhere to purely morphological species concept should also refer to the genetic characteristics before assigning any taxonomic status to the sample. However, bear in mind that all subspecies have the potential to suitable adaptations to their specific ecological habitat and also have the potential to evolve in to a new species.

4

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 monitoring of reptile populations currently isolated populations is es­sential in are of great interest for setting situations such as these. priorities for taxa as well as protected ar­eas.

Threatened species Many publications claiming Indian reptiles are a poorly- to address the conservation of studied group since information Indian reptiles communicate regarding distribution, little or nothing about the usage population dynamics and most of molecular techniques with of the information available is regard to reptile conservation; from only a few well-studied hence there is a broad lack of locations.

Owing to the genetic data, which could lead widespread destruction of to inadequate systematics India’s natural veg­etation and ending up with taxonomic landscapes, Ramakrishana revision of many taxa. In & Alfred (2006) reported 33 some ways, the current reptiles species as threatened level of knowledge of reptile category. Gavialis gangeticus population is very significant is critically endangered while even though the causes of the other two crocodile reptile declines have been species; Crocodylus porosus made without clear evidence and Crocodylus palustris and few suggestions about are threatened. The turtles how to progress. Therefore, (Dermochelys coriacea, the current situation of Dermochelys imbricate, reptile conservation in India Chelonia mydas, Lepidochelys needs special attention with olivacea, Batagur baska) further advanced research. are threatened from To overcome these problems, overexploitation and numerous the application of molecular other threats, such as habitat data is requisite to explore destruction, predation of its the accurate species limits. eggs and the slaughter of Nearly all known Indian nesting adults or flesh by reptiles probably occur in man. The monitor lizards are protected areas, even though also listed as threatened and the mere protection of a single population is obviously vulnerable. insufficient to maintain the genetic variability in Conclusion species’ component Morphology when the supplemented with more popu­lations.

To improve refined genetic data is essential representation, we need for a better understanding of a better un­derstanding of the dynamics of population in their distributions - strategic a highly frag­mented habitat. field surveys and complete Unfortunately, as of today electronic databases with there is no reported use of adequate genetic information extensive genetic studies of are vital (Graham et al. 2004) Indian reptiles to uncover for the conservation future of the divergence patterns of these animals.

Researches 5

should also include finding out the effects of geographic barriers, such as larger rivers, mountains or national highways which could restrict the movements of reptiles between populations, thus preventing any genetic exchange between them. The absence of data is not a firm basis for being indifferent to claims of reptilian declines.

One simple response is to call for immediate monitoring programs, but this requires additional consideration of, for example, how monitoring should be undertaken and which species and habitats should be investigated. To begin to address these questions, more fundamental research in reptilian biology is needed. In particular, geneticbased research will improve the knowledge of reptilian biology and will dramatically increase the chances of identifying instances of possible decline that merit dedicated study. Species that have not been reported for many years, often since their initial description, should be the main concern for accurate and precise revisions of conservation-status data.

The key in conservation assessment is to find out isolated or patchy populations in order to formulate conservation strategies.

Therefore, gaining an understanding of diversity pat­ terns, monitoring the genetic variability of populations in fragments, and comparing them to populations isolated at different times in the

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 phylogeographic differentiaof the reptiles of South Asia. past would be invaluable tion among avian populations Krieger Publishing Company, contributions to conservation and the evolutionary signifiFlorida,87pp+36pls. of Indian reptiles. Although, cance of subspecies. Auk 109: Das, I. (1997a). Checklist of the it was stated by the great 626–636. reptiles of India with English herpetologist Smith (1931) Bishop, S.C. & F.J.W. Schmidt common name. Hamadryad. “the herpetological fauna (1931). The painted turtles 22: 32–45. of the genus Chrysemys. Field Das, I. (1997b). A new species of the country is now well Museum of Natural History, of Cyrtodactylus from the known”, even after three Zoological Series 18: 123– Nicobar Islands India. Journal quarters of a century we know 139. of Herpetology 31(3): 375– little about the patterns and Bond, J.E. & P. Sierwald 382. processes responsible for the (2003). Molecular taxonomy Das, I. (2003). Growth of evolution and differentia­tion of the Anadenoblus excisus Knowledge on the Reptiles of (Diplopoda: Spirobolida: India, with an Introduction of our reptile fauna. We are Rhinocricidae) species-group to Systematics, Taxonomy still in the exploratory phase on the Caribbean island and Nomenclature. Journal of in terms of our understanding of Jamaica.

Invertebrate the Bombay natural History of India’s reptile diversity, and Systematics 17: 515–528.

Socety 100(2&3): 447–501. no area and no taxa should Conant, R. (1956). A review of Encalada, S.E., P.N. Lahanas, be regarded as having low two rare pine snakes from the K.A. Bjorndal, A.B. Gulf Coastal Plain. American Bolten, M.M. Miyamoto biological importance without Museum Novitiates 1781: & B.W. Bowen (1996). exhaustive inventories and 1–31.

Phylogeography and field sur­veys.

References Aengals, R.V.M., S. Kumar & M.J. Palot (2011).

Updated checklist of Indian reptiles. http://zsi.gov.in/ checklist/Checklist%20of%20 Indian%20Reptiles.pdf Arnold, E.N. (1993). Historical changes in the ecology and behaviour of semaphore geckos (Pristurus: Gekkonidae) and their relatives. Journal of Zoology 229: 353–384.

Avise, J.C. (2000).

Phylogeography: The History and Formation of Species.

Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Avise, J.C., B.W. Bowen, T. Lamb, A.B. Meylan & E. Bermingham (1992).

Mitochondrial DNA evolution at a turtle’s pace: Evidence for low genetic variability and reduced microevolutionary rate in the testudines. Molecular Biology and Evolution 9: 457– 473.

Ball, Jr, R.M. & J.C. Avise (1992). Mitochondrial DNA

Daniel, J.C. (2002). The Book of Indian Reptiles. Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay, 141pp.

Das, I. & A.M. Bauer (2000).

Two new species of Cnemaspis (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from southern India.

Russian Journal of Herpetology 7(1): 17–28.

Das, I. & S.P. Vijayakumar (2009).

New species of Ptychozoon (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from the Nicobar Archipelago, Indian Ocean.

Zootaxa 2095: 8–20.

Das, I. & S. Sengupta (2000).

A new species of Cnemaspis (Sauria: Gekkonidae) from Assam northeastern India.

Journal of South Asian Natural History 5(1): 17–24 Das, I. (1991). A new Species of Mabuya from Tamil Nadu State southern India (Squamata: S c i n c i d a e ) .

Journal of Herpetology 25(3): 342–344.

Das, I. (1994). The Reptiles of South Asia: Checklist and distributional summary.

Hamadryad 19:15–40.

Das, I. (1996). Biogeography 6

population structure of the Atlantic and Mediterranean green turtle Chelonia mydas: a mitochondrial DNA control region sequence assessment.

Molecular Ecology 5: 473– 483.

Giri, V.B. & M.A. Bauer.

(2008). A new grounddwelling Hemidactylus (Squamata: G e k k o n i d a e ) from Maharashtra with a key to the Hemidactylus of India.

Zootaxa 1700: 21–34.

Giri, V.B. (2008). A new rock dwelling Hemidactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from Maharashtra, India.

Hamadryad 32: 25–33.

Giri, V.B., A.M. Bauer & K.S. Gaikwad (2009b). A new ground-dwelling species of Cnemaspis Strauch (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from the northern Western Ghats, Maharashtra, India. Zootaxa 2164: 49–60.

Giri, V.B., A.M. Bauer, R. Vyas & S. Patil (2009a). New Species of Rock-Dwelling Hemidactylus (Squamata: Gekkonidae) from Gujarat, India. Journal of Herpetology

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 43(3): 385–393 Gower, D.J. & J.D. Winkler (2007).

Taxonomy of the Indian snake Xylophis Beddome ( S e r p e n t e s : Caenophidia) with description of a new species. Hamadryad 31(2): 315–329.

Haralu, B. (2010). Nagaland concerns and challenges.

Indian Birds 6(2): 56–57.

Harvey P.H., A.J.L. Brown, J.M. Smith & S. Nee (eds.).

(1996). New uses for new phylogenies. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Huxley, J.S. (ed.) (1940).

The New Systematics. Oxford University Press, London 1–538.

Lamb, T., C. Lydeard, R. Walker & J.W. Gibbons (1994).

Molecular systematics of the map turtles (Graptemys): a comparison of mitochondrial restriction site versus sequence data. Systematic Biology 43: 543–599.

Lee, M.S.Y. (2004).

The molecularization of taxonomy.

Invertebrate Systematics 18: 1–6.

Macey, R.J., J.A. Schulte, A. Larson, Z. Fang, Y. Wang, B.S. Tuniyev & T.J. Papenfuss (1998).

Phylogenetic relationships of toads in the Bufo bufo species group from the eastern escarpment of the Tibetan Plateau: a case of vicariance and dispersal.

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9: 80–87.

Mahony, S. (2010). Systematic and taxomonic revaluation of four little known Asian agamid species, Calotes kingdonwardi Smith, 1935, Japalura kaulbacki Smith, 1937, Salea k a k h i e n e n s i s Anderson, 1879 and the monotypic genus Mictopholis Smith, 1935 (Reptilia: Agamidae). Zootaxa 2514: 1–23.

Manamendra-Arachchi, K., S.

Batuwita & R. Pethiyagoda (2007). A taxonomic revision of the Sri Lankan daygeckos (Reptilia: Gekkonidae: Cnemaspis), with description of new species from Sri Lanka and southern India.

Zeylanica 7(1): 9–122.

Mayr, E. (1942). Systematics and the origin of species from the viewpoint of a zoologist.

Columbia University Press.

New York, 1–334.

Molur, S. & S. Walker (eds.)

(1998).

Report of the workshop “Conservation assessment and Management plan for Reptiles of India” (BCPP-Endangered species project), Zoo Outreach Organisation, Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, India, Coimbatore, India.

175pp.

Mukherjee, D. & S. Bhupathy (2007). A new species of wolf snake (Serpentes: Colubridae: Lycodon) from Anaikatti Hills, Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu, India. Russian Journal of herpetology 14 (1): 21–26.

Murthy, T.S.N. (1985).

Classification and distribution of the Reptiles of India. The Snake 17: 48–71.

Murthy, T.S.N. (1994). An updated hand list of the reptiles of India. Cobra 17: 17–37.

Murthy, T.S.N. (2010). The Reptile Fauna of India.

Published by B.R. Publishing Corporation, N e w Delhi.

Pook, C.E., U. Joger, N. Stümpel & W. Wüster (2009). When continents collide: Phylogeny, historical biogeography and systematic of the medically important viper genus Echis (Squamata: Serpentes: Viperidae).

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 53: 792–807.

Roderick, G.K. & R.G. Gillespie (1998).

Speciation and 7

phylogeography of Hawaiian terrestrial arthropods.

Molecular Ecology 7: 519– 531.

Seberg, O., C.J. Humphries & S. Knapp, D.W. Stevenson, G. Petersen, N. Scharff & N.M. Andersen (2003).

Shortcuts in systematics? A commentary on DNA-based taxonomy. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 63–65.

Shaffer, H.B. & M.L. McKnight (1996).

The polytypic species revisited: genetic differentiation and molecular phylogenetics of the tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum (Amphibia: Caudata) complex. Evolution 50: 417– 433.

Shaffer, H.B., G.M. Fellers, A. Magee & S.R. Voss (2000).

The genetics of amphibian declines: Population substructure and molecular differentiation in the Yosemite Toad, Bufo canorus (Anura, Bufonidae) based on single-strand conformation polymorphism analysis (SSCP) and mitochondrial DNA sequence data. Molecular Ecology 9: 245–257.

Sharma R.C. (1977). A new lizard of the genus Riopa Gray (Scincidae) from Tamil Nadu, India. R e c o r d s of the Zoological Survey of India 73(1–4): 41–44.

Sharma, R.C. (1981).

Hemidactylus porbandarensis a new geckonid lizard from Gujarat India. Bulletin of the Zoological Survey of India 4(1): 1–2.

Sharma, R.C. (1978). A new species of Phrynocephalus Kaup (Reptilia: Agamidae) from the Rajasthan desert India with notes on its ecology.

Bulletin of the Zoological Survey of India 1(3): 291– 294.

Sharma, R.C. (1998).

Fauna of India and the adjacent countries.– Reptilia

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 (Testudines and Crocodilia).

Vol. I. (Published by the Director, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata), 196pp.

Sharma, R.C. (2002). The fauna of India and the Adjacent Countries. Reptilia (Sauria) II. Published by the Director, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata), 430pp.

Sharma, R.C. (2007). The fauna of India and the adjacent countries. Reptilia (Serpentes) - III. Published by the Director, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, 410pp.

Smith, M.A., (1931). The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Vol. I Loricata, Testudines. Taylor & Francis, London, xxvii+ 185pp+2pl.

Smith, M.A. (1935). The Fauna of British India, including Ceylonand Burma. Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. II - Sauria.

Taylor & Francis, London, xiii+440pp+1pl.

Smith, M.A. (1943). The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma,including the whole of the Indo-Chinese region.

Vol. III. Serpentes. Taylor & Francis, London, xii+583pp+1 map.

Stewart, D.T. & A.J. Baker (1994). Evolution of mtDNA D-loop sequences and their use in phylogenetic studies of shrews in the subgenus Otrisorex (Sorex: Soricidae: Insectivora). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 3: 38–46.

Thorpe, R.S., C.E. Pook & A. Malhotra (2007).

Phylogeography of the Russell’s Viper (Daboia russelii) complex in relation to variation in the colour pattern and symptoms of envenoming. The Herpetological Journal 17(4): 209– 218.

Tikedar, B.K. & R.C. Sharma (1992). Handbook of Indian Reptiles. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkota, 250pp+42pls.

Tiwari, K. & S. Biswas (1973).

Two new reptiles from the Great Nicobar Island. Journal of ZoologicalSociety of India 25(1&2): 57–63.

Rooijen, J.V. & 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). The Herpetological Journal 19: 193–200.

Venugopal, P.D. (2010).

Addentum to An updated and annotated list of Indian lizards (Reptilia: Sauria) based on a review of distribution records and checklists of Indian reptiles.

Journal of Threatened Taxa 2(4): 848.

Venugopal, P.D. (2010). An updated and annotated list of Indian lizards (Reptilia: Sauria) based on a review of distribution records and checklist of Indian reptiles.

Journal of Threatened Taxa. 2(3):725–738.

Whitaker, R. and Captain, A. (2004). Snakes of India.

8

The Field Guide. Draco Books, Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu, xiv+479, pls, text-figs.

Will, K.W. & A. Rubinoff (2004).

Myth of the molecule.

DNA barcodes for species cannot replace morphology for identification and classification. Cladistics 20: 1–9.

Zambre, A., C. Sheth, S. Dalvi & N. Kulkarni (2009). First Record Of Protobothrops jerdoni xanthomelas (Günther, 1889) from Eaglenest Wildlife Sanctuary, India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 106(2): 211–213.

Zamudio, K.R., K.B. Jones & R.H. Ward (1997). Molecular systematics of short horned lizards: Biogeography and taxonomy of a widespread species complex. Systematic Biology 46: 284–305.

Zamudio, K.R. & H.W. Greene (1997). Phylogeography of the bushmaster (Lachesis muta: Viperidae): implications for neotropical biogeography, systematics and conservation.

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 62: 421– 442.

Acknowledgments I am heartily grateful to Dr. K. Venkataraman, Director, Zoological Survey of India and Dr. K. Rema Devi, Officer-inCharge, Southern Regional Centre, Zoological Survey of India for providing support and encouragement.

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Records of Indian Egg Eater Snake Elachistodon westermanni in the localities of Shegaon, District Buldhana, Maharashtra, India Abhishek Narayanan Project Coordinator, Rescue, Conservation and Education, Wildlife SOS 48, Ayodhya Nagar, Near Vatika, Shegaon, Buldhana, Maharashtra 444203, India Email: narayanan.abhishek@gmail.com

The following record is completely accidental and no systemic survey technique or search method was utilized for the same.

The Indian Egg Eater Snake is the only snake of the genus Elachistodon recorded in the Indian subcontinent.

As the name suggests, its diet primarily consists of eggs though not exclusively (known to eat geckos in captivity) (Gans & Williams 1954). Similar to its African counterpart, a snake belonging to genus Dyspeltis, it has elongated inferior processes of the anterior thoracic vertebrae. They are not only coated with enamel, but also penetrate the esophagus, which assists these snakes to break the egg shell inside the throat, and release the protein-rich yolk inside the gut (Boulenger 1890).

Indian Egg Eater Snake was thought to be extinct

by Murthy et all. (1993).

According to Malcolm smith et al. about five specimens were recorded until late 1943 from the areas surrounding Jalpaiguri District in northern Bengal Smith (1943). Captain et al. (2005) recorded it for the first time in Wardha

District of Maharashtra based on a dead specimen. Thirteen specimens (seven live, six dead) were recorded in and around Amravati District by Nande et al. (2007). Apart from this there have been several unpublished records the snake in certain localities of Vidharbha region of Maharashtra. Raju Vyas also published some photographic records in 2010 of this snake in Gujarat.

Considered extremely rare, and from isolated locations (as detailed in Table 1) it was considered as one of the least found snake species on the Indian subcontinent (Khaire 2010).

Its behavior and habits are relatively unknown (Dandge 2007), and only its diet and

description is available in the existing literature (Khaire 2010).

A snake was rescued late night at around 1100hr in the garden of a house in the locality of Shivaji Nagar, Shegaon, Maharashtra (2109’43”N & 7904’ 47”E) by Karan Thakur of Snake Rescue Volunteers, a local NGO working in the area of study.

Being unable to identify the snake on the first instance, it was decided to keep the snake for later identification provisionally being identified as an ‘Indian Egg Eater’ on the basis of descriptive photos given in the Handbook by Khaire (2010). Till then the snake was kept in a plastic translucent box with holes on the lid and adequate hiding was provided.

The snake was measured, photographed and the scales counted.

The snake was identified as Indian Egg Eater Elachistodon westermanni based on the holotype descriptions in the literature (Wall 1913; Gans & Williams 1954; Rosenberg & Gans 1976). For confirmation

Image 1. Top (Dorsal) head view of Elachistodon westermanni

9

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 Table 1. Locality distribution of Elachistodon westermanni.

Author

1

Reinhardt

Period

Locality

1863

No. of specimens

Scalation data

Rangpur, Bangladesh

Dorsal (Midbody)

Ventral

Subcaudal

15

217

59 paired

1 (Holotype) 1

2

Blandford

1875

Purnea, Bihar, India

15

208

65 fide Blandford, 63 fide wall (1913)

3

Wall

1913

Near Mal, Jalpaiguri district, West Bengal, India

15

213

62

1

4

Rosenberg & Gans

1976

Rapti Dun, Chitwan, Nepal

Not noted

210

58

1

5

Captain, A. et al.

2005

Wardha, Maharashtra, India

15

213

68

1

6

Nande et al.

2007

Amravati, Maharashtra, India

15

214

69

13 (7 live + 6 dead)

7

Raju Vyas (Photographic records)

Gujarat

Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

4 (3 live + 1 dead)

8

Balu Deshmukh

Unpublished

Akola, Maharashtra

Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

2

9

Gajendra Surkar

Unpublished

Wardha

Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

2

10

Abhishek Narayanan (Current Work)

15

210

56

1

2006-07

2010

the data was sent to Gerard Martin, Bangalore, Varad Giri, Mumbai, and Ashok Captain, Pune. The snake was released in the presence of forest officials as it is under Schedule I of the Wildlife Protection (Act) 1972, Traffic India (2010) in the forested areas close to the rescued location bearing similarities in the habitat.

The detailed description, scale counts and other measurements are tabulated (Table 2).

Shegaon, Maharashtra, India

neck becoming white specks from about mid-body (Image 2). There is a continuous vertebral yellow band which is prominent till anterior 1/3rd of the body becoming discontinuous towards the head. Tail is long and shows prehensile ability.

The head portion is narrow and indistinct from the neck with

small eyes and vertical pupils and a distinct oblique postocular streak. Frontal and parietal scales show black coloration over the brown ground color 95 and 75 % respectively and form a cross like pattern starting from the internasals to the nape of the neck. Horizontal black band starts post ocular and

Image 2. Lateral view showing head scales of Elachistodon westermanni

Morphological characters The specimen has an overall coloration as brown/tan with darker gradient towards the cephalic (head) end (Image 1). The underbelly is white in appearance beginning from about two dorsal scales adjacent to the ventral scales. Dorsally zigzag white cross bands start from the 10

Â

Table 2. Scalation data of Elachistodon westermanni Scalation pattern Number of ventrals

210

Number of subcaudals

56 pairs

Number of dorsals 1 head-length behind the head

19

Number of dorsals at the position of the middle ventral

15

Number of dorsals 1 head-length before the tail

19

Head shields

No.

Characters

Mental

Single

Wider than longer

Internasals

1 Pair

Square and large

Prefrontals

1 Pair

Narrow and extend up to loreals.

Frontal

Single

Large, bell shaped

Parietals

1 Pair

Largest of all head shields and Liver shaped

Anterior temporals

2 Pair

Long and slender

Posterior temporals

2 Pairs

Nasal / Supranasalpostnasal

1 Pair

Nasal pit in the center, with post nasal concave

Loreals

1 Pair

Trapezoidal, touches eye, 2nd, 3rd Supralabial, nasal, prefrontal and ocular

Preocular

1 Pair

Above loreal and small

Postocular

2 Pair

1st touches supra-ocular, parietal and temporal; 2nd touches temporal, 4.5 Supralabial

Supraocular

1 Pair

Narrow, C shaped

Supralabials

7 pairs

Largest is 7th, Smallest is 1. 3,4 touch eye

Infralabials

6 Pairs

3,4,5,6 paired and large

continues to join the central vertebral yellow band.

Measurements: Length: Snout-vent: 620mm; Tail: 98mm; Total: 718mm; Scalation pattern: (Table 2).

its neck and lift its upper body off the ground ready to strike (characteristic ‘S’ shaped position) (Image 4). (Like Trinket snakes and cat snakes).

But became very calm when handled off ground.

Inference: The snake has been previously recorded from Man Khettra, Junagarh District; Sasan-Gir and Surat in Gujarat followed

by Amravati and Wardha districts in Maharashtra. This current record thus fills in the gap in the distribution from the south-western borders of Gujarat to north-eastern borders of Maharashtra comprised of Saurashtra region, around Vadodara District in East Gujarat, South Gujarat and entire stretch of Vidharbha Region. This land is

Image 3. Full body view of Elachistodon westermanni showing the prominent vertebral stripe. Also, the ‘S’ shaped posture can be seen.

Behavior observations (in controlled environment) The snake was rescued at night, when it was lying on wet mud motionless outside in the garden of a house. It acted aggressively when the rescuers approached it.

It was able to move on the ground slowly with a serpentine (S-Shaped) movement (Image 3). For an aggressive display it has the ability to flatten 11

Image 4. Aggressive threat display by Elachistodon westermanni

a semi-arid zone and similar to the locality descriptions for the holotypes. With wide distribution pattern and habitat variability, this snake is important to be studied for adaptation capabilities and evolutionary changes and microhabitat preference.

References Boulenger G.A. (1890).

The Fauna Of British India including Ceylon and Burma.

Reptilia and Batrachia. Taylor and Francis, London.

Captain, A., F. Tillack, A. Gumprecht & P. Dandge (2005). First record of Elachistodon westermanni Reinhardt, 1863 (Serpentes, Colubridae, Colubrinae) from Maharashtra State, India. Russian Journal of Herpetology 12(2): 121– 123.

Dandge, P. (2007). Food and feeding habits of Elachistodon westermanni Reinhardt, 1863. Hamadryad 32: 1.

Gans, C. & E.E. Williams (1954). Present knowledge of the snake Elachistodon westermanni Reinhardt 1863.

Brevoria 36: 1–17.

Khaire, N. (2010). Snakes.

Jyotsna Prakashan, Pune, 63pp.

Murthy, T.S.N., D.P Sanyal & B. Duttagupta (1993).

Rare snakes of India. The Snake 25: 135–140.

Nande, R. & S. Deshmukh (2007). Snakes of Amravati District including Melghat, Maharashtra with important records of the Indian EggEater, Montane Trinket Snake and Indian Smooth Snake.

Zoos’ Print Journal 22(12): 2920–2924.

Rosenberg, H.I. & C. Gans (1976). Lateral jaw muscles of Elachistodon westermanni Reinhardt (Reptilia: Serpentes), Canadian Journal of Zoology 54(4): 510–521.

Smith, M.A. (1943). The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma including the whole of the Indo-Chinese Sub-Region. Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. III, Serpentes.

12

Taylor and Francis, London, xii+583pp+1 map.

Traffic India (2010). The Indian Wildlife (protection) Act, 1972 (As Amended upto 2006). Diglot Edition, Natraj publishers, Dehradun, 289pp.

Vyas, R. (2010). Distribution of Elachistodon westermanni in Gujarat. Reptile Rap, Newsletter of South Asian Reptile Network 10(June): 7–8.

Wall F. (1913). A rare snake Elachistodon westermanni from the Jalpaiguri District.

Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 22(2): 400– 401.

Acknowledgement Heartiest gratitude to Gerry Martin and Varad Giri for the constant support and encouragement.

Thanks to Ashok Captain for timely help and suggestions on the record.

Karan Thakur and Deepak Sharma from Snake Rescue Volunteers, Shegaon for giving a once in a lifetime opportunity to see and record this enigmatic snake.

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

An observation on death of Python molurus feeding on a male Spotted Deer Axis axis

morning of 02 July 2011 we were on our way to check the results of a camera trap device that we had placed in the Gara-Amgadi region of the park for monitoring leopards and tigers. There was some strange stench

Mohnish Kapoor University School of Environment Management (USEM), G.G.S.I.P University, New Delhi 110075, India Email: mohnish1989@yahoo.co.in

Ecological studies on python have showed that they feed on a variety of animals including frogs, rodents, wild cats, peafowl and ungulates like Barking Deer, Chinkara and Spotted Deer (Daniel 1983) There have been several cases where python death occurred due to movement of the prey in the gut region due to suffocation or the body is pierced by horns and antlers (Sharma 2004) We observed one such incidence in the Chilla range of Rajaji National Park, Uttarakhand in July 2011. I was working on a summer training project on monitoring of mammals in

Image 1. Python death due to male chital (The body decay is clearly visible)

the mentioned study area under the supervision of Dr. Bivash Pandav (Wildife Institute of India). On the

Image 2. The image shows the antler and the jaw of the deer seen peeking out of the decaying carcass of the python

13

in the area and following the source of the smell, we observed a pair of antlers in the nearby bushes. On moving closer to the site we saw a dead python, with an approximate length of 3.5– 4 m and a dead adult male Spotted Deer (Image 1). The male Spotted Deer had been killed by the python, but was swallowed partially till the neck region (Images 2–3).

The antler and the jaw bones of the Spotted Deer could be seen as they had pierced the body (posterior oral region) of the python.

We suspect that the python must have tried to swallow its prey, but maybe as a result of

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Image 3. Lateral view of the incident

a sudden sideways movement to facilitate swallowing or a sudden injury by the rock present beside the body of the python, the antlers and the jaws must have pierced through the body (Image 4).

The oral cavity of the python was left wide open as the head region of the deer was found entangled in the oral region of the python (Image 5). The incident must be a day or two old as beetles and flies had already started scavenging and decay of several body parts was prominent.

References Daniel, J.C. (1983). The Book of Indian Reptiles. Oxford University Press, 141pp.

Sharma, S. (2004).

An observation on suspected death of Indian Rock Python (Python molurus molurus) because of Jungle Cat. Reptile Rap Newsletter 6(September): 1.

Acknowledgements I thank my field assistant Imam, who was also present at the site of the incidence. I convey sincere regards to the forest my department of Uttarakhand, Dr. Bivash Pandav and Abishek Harihar for their kind support.

Image 4. The length of the dead python indicating that it is a large full grown adult

Image 5. Close up view of the python’s head, the jaws are spread apart as it has tried to swallow the prey and the rock present adjacent to the head of the python.

14

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Herpetofauna of the Vidyanagari campus of the University of Mumbai, Maharashtra Madhav V. Upadhye 1, Vinayak V. Puranik 2, Prasad Dabholkar 2 & Ujwala Jadhav 3 1,3 Department of Life Sciences, University of Mumbai, Santacruz (E), Mumbai, Maharashtra 400098, India 2 People for Animals (Mumbai), Parmar Guruji Marg, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400012, India Email: madhavupadhye@gmail.com (corresponding author)

Mumbai (formerly known as Bombay), considered to be the economical capital of India, is a unique city where two kinds of jungles – a concrete jungle and a real forest co-exist with each other. Despite the increasing habitat destruction resulting from mounting population in the city of Mumbai, it still has rich biodiversity.

Mumbai’s biodiversity is a product of confluence of Arabian Sea to the west and the Western Ghats to the east.

Vidyanagari campus of University of Mumbai (19004’18.5”N & 72051’21.5”E) is situated at Kalina, Santacruz which is a central suburb of Mumbai City having an area of 230 acres. In spite of the number of development and construction activities going on in the University campus, it still possesses a good vegetation cover providing habitat for a variety of fauna. Although a few attempts have been made

by Jadhav et al. (2007) and Upadhye et al. (2008) to study floral and avifaunal diversity of the campus, respectively, there is absolutely no scientific report focusing exclusively on herpetofaunal diversity of the campus. Considering the ecological importance of

herpetofauna, the present study was undertaken.

Methods The study was carried out for a total duration of 24 months from May 2008 to April 2010.

Amphibians and reptiles encountered during extensive field trips were captured, photographed (whenever possible) and carefully identified with the help of field guides (Daniel, 1983; Das 2002; Whitaker & Captain 2004) before release.

Snakes were identified using scale count as described by Smith (1943) and Daniel (1983).

Nomenclature adopted here is as given by Das (1994) and Dutta (1997) for reptiles and amphibians, respectively. Venomous snakes were released away from the human settlements at the

outskirts of the campus where there is vast, unused land with thick vegetation. Record of specimens killed under vehicles and by humans was also made.

The status of each species was observed in four categories on the basis of total number of each species encountered or sighted during the entire survey. The category values were: rare (1–4), uncommon (5–14), common (15–29) and abundant (greater than 29).

Results Amphibians: Six species of amphibians were recorded at the campus during the study period. Only three specimens of Narrow-mouthed Frog were spotted during the study while the Common Indian Toad Duttaphrynus melanostictus and Skittering Frog Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis were abundantly seen and remaining three species of amphibians (one species of toad and two of frogs) were common (Table 1).

The Common Indian Toads were frequently found hiding under the platforms in classrooms.

Reptiles: The status of the 21 species of reptiles belonging to 17 genera and

Table 1. Systematic List of amphibians of the Mumbai University campus Family Bufonidae Microhylidae

Common Name

Scientific name

Status

Common Indian Toad

Duttaphrynus melanostictus

Abundant

Marbled Toad

Duttaphrynus stomaticus

Common

Narrow-mouthed Frog

Microhyla ornata

Rare

Indian Cricket Frog

Fejervarva limnocharis

Common

Euphlyctis cyclophlyctis

Abundant

Hoplobatrachus tigerinus

Common

Dicroglossidae Skittering Frog Indian Bull Frog 15

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 eight families recorded from Mumbai University campus is provided in Table 2.

Five species of the family Gekkonidae, two species of Agamidae and a species of Scincidae lizards were observed at the campus.

Northern House, Northern Spotted Geckos and Southern House Geckos along with Indian Garden Lizard were observed in abundance at the

campus while the Bark Gecko Hemidactylus leschenaulti was rarely spotted. Common skinks or Keeled Grass Skinks Eutropis carinata were observed in great numbers especially in early mornings under the rocks and leaf litter.

A specimen was rescued from a classroom located on the third floor of the Department of Life Sciences.

Two gravid female

Table 2. Systematic List of reptiles of the Mumbai University campus Family

Common name

Scientific name

Status

Trionychidae

Indian Flapshell Turtle (Image 1)

Lissemys punctata

Rare

Northern House Gecko (Yellow-green House Gecko)

Hemidactylus flaviviridis

Abundant

Southern House Gecko

Hemidactylus frenatus

Abundant

Brook’s House Gecko

Hemidactylus brookii

Common

Rock or Northern Spotted Gecko

Hemidactylus maculates

Abundant

Bark Gecko

Hemidactylus leschenaulti

Rare

Indian Garden Lizard (Image 2)

Calotes versicolor

Abundant

Fan-throated Lizard

Sitana ponticeriana

Common

Eutropis carinata

Abundant

Gongylophis conicus*

Common

Ahaetulla nasutus*

Rare

Buff-striped Keelback

Amphiesma stolata*

Abundant

Checkered Keelback (Image 6)

Xenochropis piscator*

Abundant

Rat Snake (Image 7)

Ptyas mucosus*

Abundant

Macropisthodon plumbicolor*

Uncommon

Lycodon aulicus*

Common

Argyrogena fasciolatus*

Uncommon

Dendrelaphis tristis*

Rare

Oligodon arnensis*

Common

Naja naja**

Common

Daboia russelii **

Common

Gekkonidae

Agamidae Scincidae Boidae

Colubridae

Elapidae Viperidae

Common Skink (Image 3) Common Sand Boa (Image 4) Common Vine Snake (Image 5)

Green Keelback (Image 8) Common Wolf Snake (Image 9) Banded Racer (Image 10) Common Bronze-back Tree Snake (Image 11) Banded Kukri Snake (Image 12) Spectacled Cobra (Image 13) Indian Russell’s Viper (Image 14)

* - Non-venomous; ** - Venomous 16

specimens of Indian Flapshell Turtle Lissemys punctata were rescued from the road bordering the vast marshy wetlands in the monsoon, which may have come accidentally onto the road (on land) for laying eggs. They were released safely back into the adjacent riverine habitat.

Among the 12 species of snakes recorded on the campus, nine were found to belong to the family Colubridae, out of which only one was semi-venomous and the rest were non-venomous.

Rat Snake, Checkered Keelback and Buff-striped Keelback were seen abundantly on the campus.

Buff-striped Keelbacks were seen in great numbers in monsoon season as they gathered for mating.

Checkered Keelbacks were sighted near the pond and in the canals of the campus, mainly near water resources.

Couple of road-killed specimens of Checkered Keelbacks were seen.

A number of nonvenomous Rat Snakes were rescued from the academic buildings during the study and released.

The longest specimen measured just over 2.4m. Rat Snakes were also found to be killed by grass cutters in the campus as these are commonly mistaken for the venomous Spectacled Cobra.

Even though, two of the big fours in India—Russell’s’ Viper and Spectacled Cobra—were found to be quite common at the campus, fortunately no human bite cases have been recorded.

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 © Madhav Upadhye

Image 1. Indian Flapshell Turlte

© Atmaj Rane

Image 3. Common Skink

Image 2. Indian Garden Lizard

© Atmaj Rane

Image 4. Common Sand Boa

© Vinayak Puranik

17

Discussion The present results indicate that Vidyanagari campus of Mumbai University is considerably richer in terms of its herpetofaunal diversity when compared to observationsmade by Wadatkar (2004) in the campus of University of Amravati. The investigator reported 12 species of snakes, two species of geckos, three species of skinks and one species of Calotes in his study. These observations are significantly important when considering the fact that unlike that of Vidyanagari campus of Mumbai University the Amravati University campus is covered by hilly forested area and

© Vinayak Puranik

Image 5. Common Vine Snake

Image 6. Checkered Keelback

© Vinayak Puranik

Image 7. Rat Snake

1

© Vinayak Puranik

therefore, ideally expected to be richer in herpetofauna.

However, Bengal Monitor Varanus bengalensis which was reported to be common at Amravati campus was found to be totally absent at Mumbai University campus.

The significance of herpetofauna in ecology needs no emphasis.

The insect populations are regulated by amphibians such as toads and frogs along with reptiles like lizards and skinks. Snakes are of tremendous importance in the food chain as they keep the population of rats and mice under check.

Nowadays, biodiversity in urban areas is threatened by urbanization, pollution, habitat destruction, climate change, introduction of alien species and extinction cascade where extinction of one species causes extinction of other (Jadhav et al. 2007). The rich herpetofaunal diversity observed in the present survey could be attributed to the suitable habitats such as gardens, marshy wetlands, grasslands, ponds, canals and to the presence of variety of plant types like herbs, shrubs, trees, bamboos etc. (over 292 plant species: Jadhav et al. 2007) in the University campus providing shelter and food for a vast array of species. The need for green spaces like Vidyanagari campus which provides a safe haven for various species cannot be overemphasized.

The present study which is the first ever study of herpetofauna of the campus,

© Vinayak Puranik

Image 8 .Green Keelback

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Image 9. Common Wolf Snake

© Vinayak Puranik

Image 10. Banded Racer

is hoped to be useful for the scientific community, students and to the teaching and nonteaching staff of the campus to add to the present knowledge.

Awareness lectures are being arranged at the campus for a better consciousness about herpetofauna and for requesting people not to kill herpetofauna, especially snakes.

References Daniel, J.C. (1983). The Book of Indian Reptiles. Bombay Natural History Society,

© Vinayak Puranik

Image 12. Banded Kukri Snake

Image 11. Common Bronze-back Tree Snake

1

© Vinayak Puranik

© Vinayak Puranik

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 Guide to Snakes and Other Reptiles of India. New Holland Publishers, UK, 144pp.

Dutta, S.K. (1997). Amphibians of India and Sri Lanka (Checklist and Bibliography).

Odyssey Publication House, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India, 342pp.

Jadhav, U., M.V. Upadhye, A.Y. Utekar, A. Deshmane, C.A. Thomas & R.C. Patil (2007). Biodiversity studies of Vidyanagari Campus of Mumbai University, pp. 19–24.

In: Vishwakarma, K.S. (ed.).

EnvironmentalDegradationand Management - Vol. III. Society for Science and Environment, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India.

Smith, M.A. (1943). Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma - Reptiles and Amphibia, Vol. III Serpentes. Taylor and Francis, London, 583pp.

Upadhye, M.V., U. Jadhav, A.Y. Utekar & R.C. Patil (2008).

Avifauna of Mumbai University Campus. Ecology, Environment and Conservation 14(2&3): 461–464.

Wadatkar, J.S. (2004).

Herpetofauna of the Amravati University Campus, Maharashtra.

Zoos’ Print Journal 19(2): 1381–1382.

Whitaker, R. & A. Captain (2004). Snakes of India: The Field Guide. Draco Books, Chennai, India, 481pp.

Image 13. Specktacled Cobra

© Vinayak Puranik

Image 14. Russell’s Viper

© Vinayak Puranik

Mumbai, India, 238pp.

Das, I. (1994). The reptiles of South Asia: checklist,

distribution and summary.

Hamadryad 19: 15–40.

Das, I. (2002). A Photographic

20

Acknowledgment Authors would like to express their sincere thanks to Prof. S. V. Deshmukh, former Head, University Department of Life Sciences for his cooperation and encouragement.

Thanks are also due to Varun Torsekar, Research Scholar, Indian Institute of Sciences, Bangalore for his support.

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Herpetofaunal diversity in and around the selected man-made wetlands of central and northern Gujarat, India Raju Vyas 1, B.M. Parasharya 2 & J.J. Jani 3 505, Krishnadeep Tower, Mission Road, Fatehgunj, Vadodara, Gujarat 390002, India 2 AINP on Agricultural Ornithology, 3 AICRP on Biological Control of Crop Pests and Weeds, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, Gujarat 388110, India Email: 1 razoovyas@hotmail.com (corresponding author), 2 parasharya@yahoo.com, 3 janchait01@yahoo.com 1

Water is the fundamental need of all living organisms.

Without water, life is impossible.

Depending on the type of wetland, many species of life forms i.e. high biological diversity is found in and around them. Wetlands are classified on the basis of quality and quantity of the water. The lack of easy availability of this liquid gold i.e. water, either in terms of quality or the quantity or both parameters, has led us (human beings) to search other alternatives to fulfill our water requirements.

Presently, it has been noted that the species diversity of inland water ecosystems is most threatened and in many parts of the world, it is in continuous and accelerating decline (MEA 2006). In India, as elsewhere in the world, freshwater and freshwaterdependent ecosystems provide a range of ecological services for humans like drinking water, fish, flood protection and wildlife (Postel 1998; Revenga & Kura 2003). As population and associated water demands increase, balancing the requirement between

the aquatic environment and developmental needs is becoming critical in many of the world’s river basins, India being no exception (WII 2010).

To fulfill our basic needs and requirements, we develop or construct a new water body, either as a dam on river systems, or as rainwater collected in artificial earthen depressions or by creating water reservoirs or by other alternatives like the use of ground water by constructing wells, hand pumps and other such extraction mechanisms.

Such kind of man-made water bodies are the results of alteration of a large area of habitat; either the forestlands or scrublands getting submerged in water. These kinds of water bodies support many types of biodiversity.

We know the irrigation and agricultural values, but are still ignorant about the types of biodiversity actually/ directly supported by such kind of man-made water bodies.

Therefore, we explored five representative manmade water bodies in central and northern Gujarat, with a 21

view to prepare an inventory of biodiversity, especially herpetofauna found in and around the man-made water bodies. We have also tried to assess the true significance of the water bodies other than the agricultural importance.

Objectives The study was carried out with the following objectives, (i) To collect the base line information of reptiles and amphibians in and around the water bodies, (ii) To study the status of herpetofauna from these areas, (iii) To know the importance of such kind of water bodies from the viewpoint of biodiversity conservation, (iv) To suggest multipurpose management for versatile use without the violation of original objectives and purpose of the water bodies.

Study area There are various sizes of man-made water bodies available in various biodiversity zones.

It is also found that they are either surrounded with agricultural fields or share boundaries with protected areas of the state. Therefore, the study was conducted in five man-made water bodies, namely: (i) Hathmati dam, (ii) Dantiwada dam, (iii) Deo dam, (iv) Kanewal water tank and (v) Pariej water tank (Fig. 1).

The first three water bodies are “dam� type water bodies and are built on river systems, namely Hathmati

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Figure 1. The location site of five man-made water bodies in Gujarat State

River, Banas River and DevDhadhar River, respectively and the remaining two water bodies; Kanewal and Pariej are “water tank” type water bodies and are filled by the waters of Mahi and Narmada irrigation canals of Vanakbori Dam and Sardar Sarovar (Narmada Dam).

First three water bodies are for irrigation purpose, whereas the waters of Kanewal and Pariej water tanks are utilized for irrigational purpose and as drinking water by the surrounding towns and villages. The topographic, salient features and other

relevant details of the water bodies are mentioned in Table 1.

Methods All these five water bodies were surveyed in various seasons, during 2004 and 2005. A total of 30 field days were spent for the study, to find out the estimate of species of amphibian and reptiles surviving in and around these water bodies.

This is considering the area around the water body as ‘500m area from the demarcation of high water marks of the particular water 22

body’.

Each one of the identified water bodies was surveyed through a rapid survey and various potential areas were selected surrounding the water bodies for the aspect of availability of amphibians and reptilian species. These habitats were intensively explored (especially microhabitats) through repeated visits in various seasons.

During the study, all the important species have been documented through the colored photographs and as and when close examination was required, the animals were caught with various known methods of catching amphibians and reptiles.

All caught animals were released in the same habitat after recording the necessary data.

All collected specimens were examined and carefully identified by using the diagnostic keys, given by Smith (1935, 1943) and Daniel (1963a, 1963b and 1975) & Daniels (1997) and nomenclatures adopted here are those of Das (1994 & 2003), Dutta (1997) and Frost et al. (2006) for reptiles and amphibians, respectively.

Field surveys: (a) visual encounter surveys, (b) watching aquatic reptilian species through the field binoculars (10x50), and (c) recording the species through indirect evidences like shell, molt/moult and sound.

In addition, secondary information was

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 Table 1. Salient features of the water bodies from study area at Gujarat State, India Kanewal

Hathmati

Banas

Deo

Tarapur, Anand 22033’N & 72038’E Irrigation & Drinking Mahi Right Bank Canal

Tarapur, Anand 22028’N & 72032’E Irrigation & Drinking Mahi Right Bank Canal

595km2

2862km2

259km2

--

--

32.36km2

40.47km2

16.68km2

---

--

3750ha

4050ha

1868ha

445ha

625ha

14 partial & 6 full

12 partial

11 partial & 9 full

----

6

gathered from local people of surrounding villages, staff of forest department and irrigation department.

Other wildlife enthusiasts were also inquired about the presence of different species of amphibians and reptiles by showing the colour pictures of the species.

Results and Discussion During the study period, we were able to collect information about the availability of nine species of amphibians belonging to four families (Table 2) and 25 species of reptiles belonging to 14 families (Table 3) from in and around the earlier mentioned five water bodies of Gujarat State. Of which, nine species are toads and frogs, one species of crocodile, two species of turtles, twelve species of lizards and ten species of snakes. The record of availability of herpetofauna at each water body shows that the highest number of amphibians and reptilian species were recorded from

Irrigation

Deo dam and the lowest number was recorded from Pariej water tank (Fig. 2).

Out of the total 34 species of amphibians and reptiles, 17 species were recorded from all five wetlands, including four species of anuran-

amphibians (one species of toad and three species of frogs) and 13 species of reptiles (one species of turtle, seven species of lizards and five species of snakes).

The Common Indian Tree Frog Polypedates maculatus

Table 2. Systematic list of amphibians species recorded in and around Hathmati dam, Dantiwad dam, Deo dam, Pariej water tank and Kanewal water tank, Gujarat State, India

Kanewal

Area at full reservoir level Area under submergence No. of villages under submergence

Pariej

Kuberpura Panchmahal 22022’N & 73033’E

Pariej

Area of catchment

Deo

Dantiwada, Banaskantha 24010’N & 72029’E Irrigation & Flood control

Deo

Present Purpose of water body Water body located on River

Dantiwada

Fatepur Sabarkantha 23042’N & 73013’E Irrigation & Flood control

Dantiwada

Latitude & Longitude

Hathmati

Hathmati

Location: nearer village & District

Common Asian Toad (Duttaphrynus melanostictus)

P

P

P

P

P

Marbled Toad (Duttaphrynus stomaticus)

P

P

-

-

-

Common name (Scientific name)

Bufonidae

Microhylidae Ornate Narrow-mouthed Frog (Microhyla ornata)

P

P

P

Marbled Balloon Frog (Uperodon systoma)

-

P

P

P -

-

Dicroglossidae Indian Skipping Frog (Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis)

P

P

P

P

P

Indian Bull Frog (Hoplobatrachus tigerinus)

P

P

P

P

P

Cricket Frog (Fejervarya limnocheris)

P

P

P

P

P

Short-headed Burrowing Frog (Sphaerotheca breviceps)

P

P

P

-

P

-

-

P

-

-

7

8

8

4

6

Rhacophoridae Indian Tree Frog (Polypedates maculatus) Total Species P - presence of species 23

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 35 Family

Genus

Species

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Hathmati Dam

Dantiwada Dam

Deo Dam

Pariej Water Tank

Kanewal Water Tank

Figure 2. The pictograph of herpetofanal diversity at five man-made water bodies of Gujarat State, India

and Crocodile Mugger Crocodylus palustris were recorded only at Deo dam, while Lacertidae lizards Snake-eyed Lacerta Ophisops jerdonii and Indian Fringetoed Lizard Acanthodactylus cantoris were found only at Dantiwada dam. The Common Indian Wolf Snake Lycodon aulicus was recorded at Kanewal water tank only.

Present study indicates a good amphibian and reptilian diversity supported by manmade water bodies.

The amphibian and reptilian diversity is dependant on the surrounding habitat of these water bodies. The highest diversity was recorded at Deo and Dantiwada dams because both the water bodies are situated very close to the protected areas and in river basin areas which included agricultural fields also. Whereas, lower diversity was recorded at Kanewal and Pariej water

tanks because both the wetlands are situated on the plains with earthen bunds

on their periphery and are surrounded by agricultural fields. These two wetlands are far away from the forests and protected areas.

Here, we come across a valuable suggestion after the present study that Gujarat State has over 300 manmade water bodies ranging from small to large sizes. The concerned criteria for further actions should not only be the utility of the water and the size of these reservoirs but also the overall biodiversity existent in and around the water body. Our experience with the department of irrigation suggests that they consider a solitary point of view and that point is the

Image 1. One of the commonly sighted skink in the study area; Common Keeled Grass Skink Eutrophis carinata 24

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 Table 3. Systematic list of reptilian species recorded in and around five man-made water bodies of Gujarat State, India Common name (Scientific name)

Hathmati

Dantiwada

Deo

Pariej

Kanewal

-*

-

P

-

-

Crocodildae 1

Mugger (Crocodylus palustris) Trinychidae

2

Indian Softshell Turtle (Nilssonia gangeticus)

-

P

P

-

-

3

Indian Flapshell Turtle (Lissemys punctata)

P

P

P

P

P

Gekkonidae 4

Brook’s House Gecko (Hemidactylus brookii)

P

P

P

P

P

5

Yellow-green House Gecko (Hemidactylus flaviviridis)

P

P

P

P

P

6

Bark Gecko (Hemidactylus leschenultii)

-

P

P

-

-

Agamidae 7

Garden Lizard (Calotes versicolor)

P

P

P

P

P

8

Fan-throated Lizard (Sitana ponticeriana)

P

P

P

P

P

-

P

P

-

-

Chamaeleonidae 9

Indian Chamaeleon (Chamaeleo zeylanicus) Scincidae

10

Spotted Supple Skink (Lygosoma puncatus)

P

P

P

-

-

11

Common Keeled Grass Skink (Eutrophis carinata) (Image 1)

P

P

P

P

P

Striped Grass Skink (Eutrophis macularius)

P

P

P

P

P

12

Lacertidae 13

Snake-eyed Lacerta (Ophisops jerdonii)

-

P

-

-

-

14

Indian Fringe-toed Lizard (Acanthodactylus cantoris)

-

P

-

-

-

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

Common Sand Boa (Gangylophis conica)

P

P

Common Red Sand Boa (Eryx johnii)

P

P

P

P

Varanidae 15

Bengal Monitor (Varanus bengalensis) Typhlopidae

16

Brahminy Worm Snake (Ramphotyphlops braminus) Boidae

17 18

P P

P

Pythonidae 19

Indian Rock Python (Python molurus)

Report

Colubridae 20

Common Wolf Snake (Lycodon aulicus)

P

21

Indian Rat Snake (Ptyas mucosus)

P

P

P

P

P

22

Checkered keel-back Water Snake (Xenochrophis piscator)

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

15

22

22

14

15

Elapidae 23

Spectacled Cobra (Naja naja) Viperidae

24

Saw-scaled Viper (Echis carinatus)

25

Russell’s Viper (Daboia russelii)

P Total

P - presence; * - past record

25

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 agricultural requirement for the management of manmade water bodies.

References Daniel, J.C. (1963a). Field guide to amphibian of western India. Part-I. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 60: 415–438.

Daniel, J.C. (1963b). Field guide to amphibian of western India. Part-II. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 60: 690–702.

Daniel, J.C. (1975). Field guide to amphibian of western India. Part-III. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 72: 506–522.

Daniels, R.J.R. (1997). A field guide to the frog and toads of the Western Ghats, India.

Part I, II and III. Cobra (27 to 29): 1–25, 1–24 and 1–13.

Das, I. (1994). The reptiles of South Asia: checklist and distribution summery.

Hamadryad 19:15–40.

Das, I. (2003). Growth of knowledge on the Reptiles of India, with an introduction to

systematic, taxonomy and nomenclature. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 100 (2&3): 446– 501.

Dutta, S.K. (1997). Amphibians of India and Sri Lanka (checklist and bibliography).

Odyssey Publication House, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India.

342pp.

Frost, D.R., T. Grant, J. Faivovich, R.H. Bain, A. Haas, C.F.B. Haddad, R.O. Desa, Channing, M. Wilkinson, S.C. Donnellan, C.J. Raxworthy, J.A. Campbell, B.L. Blotto, P. Moler, R.C. Drewes, R.A. Nussbaum, J.D. Lynch, D.M. Green & W.C. Wheeler (2006).

The amphibian tree of life. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History (297): 1–370.

MEA (2006). Inland water systems.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Reports.

Washington, D.C. Postel, S.L. (1998). Water for food production: will there be enough in 2015? Bioscience 48: 629-637.

26

Revenga, C. & Y. Kura (2003). Status and trends of biodiversity of inland water ecosystems. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Technical Series No. 11.

Smith, M.A. (1935). Fauna of British India, Reptile & Amphibian Vol. II. Taylor and Francis, London, 185pp.

Smith, M.A. (1943). Fauna of British India, Reptile & Amphibian Vol. III., Taylor and Francis, London, 583pp.

WII (2010).

Assessment of ecological impacts of the proposed lift irrigation scheme on Chambal River at Kanera, District Bhind, Madhya Pradesh.

Study report. Wildlife Institute of India. Dehradun, 56pp.

Acknowledgements We are thankful to the Gujarat State Forest Department for financial support through an ad hoc project on the wetlands. We (BMP and JJJ) are also thankful to Officer-in-Charge, Biological Control Research Laboratory, Anand Agricultural University for encouragement.

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

A Malabar Pit Viper, Trimeresurus malabaricus (Jerdon, 1854) morph from the southern Western Ghats Arun Kanagavel 1, Rajkumar Sekar 2, Nikhil Whitaker 3 & Rajeev Raghavan 4 Conservation Research Group (CRG), St. Albert’s College, Cochin, Kerala 682018, India 3 Centre for Herpetology/Madras Crocodile Bank Trust, Mamallapuram, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 603104, India 4 Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE), University of Kent, Canterbury, CT2 7NR, United Kingdom.

Email: 1 arun.kanagavel@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 raajkumar_ seker@yahoo.com, 3 nikhil.whitaker@gmail.com, 4 rajeevraq@hotmail.com 1,2,4

The Malabar Pit Viper, Trimeresurus malabaricus (Jerdon, 1854) is a mediumsized snake, endemic to the tropical rainforests of the Western Ghats occurring between 123m and 2134m above sea level on bushes, trees and rocks, often in close proximity to forest streams (Whitaker & Captain

2008; Sawant et al. 2010).

Being polymorphic, the basic colour profile of a Malabar Pit Viper varies between green, olive, brown, yellow, blue, reddish-brown and maroon, speckled with black and brown spots which may form a zigzag pattern (Whitaker & Captain 2008). In this note we describe the sighting of

a morph of T. malabaricus from the semi-evergreen forests of the Vazhachal Forest Division (10019’48.5”N & 76040’8.4”E) in the Kerala region of Western Ghats.

Our sighting was made at an elevation of 694m, and the viper was found resting on a dry twig, 9cm from the forest floor, with relatively little undergrowth, beside a forest path at 1650hr on 15th January 2011.

The specimen was orange yellow in color and was without the typical brown or black spots on the body, characteristic of the other morphs (Whitaker & Captain 2008).

In this specimen, the prominent spots were replaced by a darker orange tone forming a zigzag pattern identical to the other variations.

The

Image 1. The Malabar Pit Viper morph from Vazhachal Forest Division reported here

1

© Arun Kanagavel

Image 2. The common Malabar Pit Viper morph from Vazhachal Forest Division

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

© Arun Kanagavel

coloration on the head was uniform and without the usual speckled appearance (Images 1 & 2).

The individual was identified as T. malabaricus by its large and distinct triangular head, weak keels on dorsal scales, 19 dorsal scales at midbody, nine supralabials and 11 infralabials.

Many vipers in India like the Saw-scaled Viper Echis carinatus, Humpnosed Pit Viper Hypnale hypnale, Cantor’s Pit Viper Trimeresurus cantor, and Malabar Pit Viper exhibit polymorphism (Whitaker & Captain 2008). The reason for polymorphism, however, has not been investigated in any of these species. Pit vipers from the Goa region of the Western Ghats have

been suggested to be habitat specific, their distribution being affected by seasonal changes in temperature and humidity (Sawant et al.

2010). If this distribution is unaffected by detectability of the species due to seasonal difference, polymorphism exhibited by the Malabar Pit Viper may not be due to thermoregulation but rather for camouflage. Additional factors such as locality (see Kark et al. 1997) and wider habitat use (Sawant et al.

2010) may also influence polymorphism.

References Kark, S., I. Warburg & Y.L. Werner (1997).

Polymorphism in the snake Psammophis schokari on both sides of the desert edge 28

in Israel and Sinai. Journal of Arid Environments 37: 513– 527.

Sawant, N.S., T.D. Jadhav & S.K. Shyama (2010).

Distribution and abundance of pit vipers (Reptilia: Viperidae) along the Western Ghats of Goa, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 2(10): 1199–1204.

Whitaker, R. & A. Captain (2008). Snakes of India The Field Guide. Draco Books, Chennai, 385pp.

Acknowledgements The first author would like to thank Romulus Whitaker for confirming the identity of the specimen, the Zoological Society of London for financial support under the Erasmus Barlow Expedition Grant and the Department of Forest and Wildlife, Government of Kerala for the research permits (WL127326/2010).

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Sightings of King Cobra Ophiophagus hannah in northern coastal Andhra Pradesh K.L.N. Murthy 1 & K.V. Ramana Murthy 2 1 Biologist, Indira Gandhi Zoological Park, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh 530040, India 2 Executive Director, Green Mercy, Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India Email: 1 klnmurthy25@gmail.com, 2 green333mercy@gmail.com

The King Cobra Ophiophagus hannah Cantor, 1836, is the largest venomous snake in the world, reaching to a length of up to 5.85m (Aagaard 1924). Although not a common snake, the species has a wide distribution (David & Vogel 1996). This monotypic genus of the family Elapidae is considered as a species complex by Das (2002), as the species varies in coloration, scalation and body proportion throughout its range.

In India, the distribution range of the species is recorded as Western Ghats, Uttar Pradesh (Terai), Bihar, Orissa, West Bengal, northeastern India and also the Andaman Islands (Whitaker & Captain 2004).

In its distributional range, the species is recorded from various habitat types such as lowland, wet tropical forest, coastal rainforest, tropical and subtropical wet montane forest, dry forest, swamps and marshes, open scrubland, plantation and cultivated areas, alluvial and terai grassland, mangrove swamps, open country and disturbed areas, and near human habitations (Narayan & Rosalind 1989; David & Vogel 1996; Selich & Këstle

2002; Leviton et al. 2003).

The King Cobra is listed under Schedule II of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972; Appendix II of CITES; and in the Vulnerable category by IUCN (2010) which also recommends research into, and monitoring of the population status of this species to gain a better understanding of how the population responds to threats and conservation.

In the present paper, we report the sightings of Ophiophagus hannah from different locations

in the northern coastal Andhra Pradesh region (18012’10.83” & 83004’30.95” to 18048’38.31”N & 0 83 48’52.44”N approximately) over the last few years (Image 1). Two large male King Cobras were even killed by locals on two separate occasions in this region which encompasses three districts of Srikakulam, Vizianagaram and Visakhapatnam respectively. A 4.26m long male King Cobra (Images 2 & 3) was spotted dead by volunteers of Green Mercy (an NGO working for wildlife conservation in the three districts) on 28th July 2009, at Sitampeta forest area 18040’33.96”N & 83048’27.11”E in Srikakulam (Murthy & Murthy 2010).

The dead King Cobra weighed about 6.5kg and as the specimen was decomposing

Image 1. Different locations where sightings of Ophiophagus hannah were reported between 2006–2010 (Map Source: Google Earth 2011) 29

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Image 2. Dead Ophiophagus hannah specimen

Image3. Dorsal View of the head preserved at Science college in Srikakulam.

fast, it was carried to a nearby science college and preserved in 10% formalin solution.

On enquiring, it was learnt that the snake was killed by people from surrounding villages. In another incident, a 3.84m long male King Cobra weighing 5.7kg was stoned to death by locals (Images 4 & 5) at Kapusompuram,

a small village near S. Kota Town 18006’57.67”N & 0 83 04’35.23”E. This incident took place on 30 October 2010.

King Cobras have been sighted here by locals, forest department personnel and members of Green Mercy Organization in the recent past.

The geographic region of 30

north Coastal Andhra has varied habitats ranging from coasts to dry, thorny, scrub to dry, deciduous forests and sal forests. Small pockets of semi-evergreen and moist deciduous forests do exist in Makkuva, Duggeru and Salur forest blocks of Vizianagaram Division.

This division occupies a very strategic position owing to the fact that many wild animals including elephants wander into this district from the adjacent state of Orissa on a regular basis. There are unconfirmed occasional sightings of King Cobras by locals from this region and also few other locations in Srikakulam and Visakhapatnam divisions as well.

Direct evidence like actual sightings, killings by humans as well as indirect evidence in the form of shed skins, skeletal remains, tracks, and deserted leaf nests clearly suggests the occurrence of the species in this region.

Furthermore, there have been reports in the local electronic and print media about sightings and killings of King Cobras with visuals.

The species was also sighted by locals near Sunnapu Gedda Waterfalls in the adjoining Sitampet mandal of Srikakulam District which lies at Andhra-Orissa border (K.V. Ramana Murthy, Green Mercy, 25-08-2010 pers. comm. ).

There is an apparent dearth of information regarding the exact distributional status of the species in northern coastal Andhra Pradesh due

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Image 4. Ophiophagus hannah killed by villagers near S.Kota Town.

Coastal Andhra Pradesh.

Awareness programmes for local communities should be carried out to educate them about the ecological significance of the species and their conservation importance.

References

Image 5. Flattened head of Ophiophagus hannah

to paucity of herpetological surveys.

Invariably, it is a serious impediment for chalking out conservation management strategies.

Lack of awareness and prevalent myths lead to unnecessary killing of these majestic serpents. Perhaps, habitat destruction, poaching and redundant killings by locals are taking a heavy toll on the resident King Cobra

population. Developing interlinking corridors between forest areas i.e., from S.Kota – Araku-Salur – Duggeru– Parvathipuram and Sitampeta regions could be useful for the long-term survival of King Cobra populations in Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, we recommend that immediate intensive surveys be carried out in all the three districts of northern 31

Aagaard, C.J. (1924). Cobras and King Cobras. Natural History Bulletin Siam Society 6: 315-316.

David, P. & G. Vogel (1996).

The Snakes of Sumatra: An Annotated Checklist and Key with Natural History Notes.

Edition Chimaira, Frankfurtau-Main, Germany, 260pp.

Das, I. (2002). A Photographic Guide to Snakes and Other Rep­tiles of India. New Holland Publishers Ltd., London, UK, 144pp.

IUCN (2010). Ophiophagus hannah. In: IUCN 2010.

2010 Red List of Threatened Species. <http://www. iucnredlist.org/apps/ redlist/details/177540/0> Downloaded on 27 March 2011.

Leviton, A.E., G.O.U. Wogan, M.S. Koo, G.R. Zug, R.S.

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012 Lucas & J.V. Vindum (2003). The dangerously venomous snakes of Myanmar. Illustrated checklist with keys. Proceedings. of the California Academy of Sciences 54(2): 407–462.

Murthy K.L.N & K.V. Ramana Murthy (2010) Dead King Cobra Ophiophagus hannah found near Srikakulam in North Coastal Andhra Pradesh. Reptile Rap 6: 2728.

Narayan, G. & L. Rosalind (1989).

King cobra in

grassland; an unusual habitat.

Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 87(2): 309.

Selich, H. & W. Kästle (eds.)

(2002). Amphibians and Reptiles of Nepal. Gantner, A.R.G. Verlag V.G.,& Ruggell (distributed by Koeltz, Koenigstein, Germany), 1201pp+127pls (including 374 col. figs).

Whitaker, R. & A. Captain (2004). Snakes of India, The Field Guide. Draco Books, Chennai, xiv+481pp.

Acknowledgements This self-funded survey is an off-shoot of Green Mercy Organisation’s Conservation Programme to save snake fauna in Srikakulam and Vizianagaram districts. We are grateful to the field staff of Forest Department of all the three districts for their vital inputs and members of Green Mercy who have been very instrumental in data collection.

We would like to express our heartfelt thanks to Mr. P. Gowri Shankar of Agumbe Rainforest Research Station for his valuable inputs on the manuscript.

REPTILE RAP OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD

Date of publication: 04 June 2012

ISSN: 2230-7079 (online) Editor: Sanjay Molur Editorial Advisor: Sally Walker

No. 14 | June 2012

SARN Co-chairs: Sanjay Molur & S. Bhupathy REPTILE RAP is the Newsletter of the South Asian Reptile Network (SARN).

REPTILE RAP is published by Zoo Outreach Organization and Conservation Breeding Specialist Group South Asia as a service to the South Asian reptile conservation community as well as conservation actioners and enthusiasts at large.

Reptile Rap is registered under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License, which allows unrestricted use of articles in any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by providing adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.

OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD

REPTILE RAP is available online at www.zoosprint.org

South Asian Reptile Network c/o Zoo Outreach Organization, 96, Kumudam Nagar, Villankurichi Road, Coimbatore 641035, Tamil Nadu, India Ph: +91 422 2665298, 2665101, 2665450 Fax: +91 422 2665472 Email: herpinvert@gmail.com REPTILE RAP is available online at www.zoosprint.org/Newsletters/ReptileRap.htm 32

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

First record of Slender Coral Snake Calliophis melanurus (Shaw, 1802) south of the Palghat Gap, Western Ghats G. Shine 1 & P.O. Nameer 2 1 College of Forestry, Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur, Kerala 680656 India 2 Department of Wildlife Sciences, College of Forestry, Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur, Kerala 680656 India Email: 1 shinecof@gmail.com, 2 nameerpo@gmail.com

The Kerala Agricultural University (KAU) main campus is located at Vellanikkara, Thrissur District, Kerala (Fig. 1 & Image 1). The campus has a total area of 391.44ha having garden lands, botanical garden, plantations of Coconut Cocos nucifera, Rubber Hevea braziliensis, Arecanut Areca catechu, Cocoa Theobroma cacao, Plantain Musa paradisiaca, and orchards of Mango Mangifera indica, Jack Artocarpus heterophyllus, Sapota Manilkara achras and Guava Psidium guajava and Fodder Grasses Pennisetum pedicellatum.

The KAU campus is very near to the Peechi-Vazhani Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Ghats, the aerial distance of which is not more than 4â&#x20AC;&#x201C;5 km. KAU campus is located south of the Palghat Gap. KAU campus enjoys a moderate climate. The main source of atmospheric precipitation is the south-west and north-east monsoons.

The greater portion of the rain is from south-west monsoon between June and September.

The 10-year mean minimum temperature is 23.30C and 10-year mean

maximum of 31.80C. The mean annual rainfall is 2763mm. The mean number of rainy days per year is 110 days (KAU weather station, 2010).

Out of the 275 species of snakes of India (Whitaker & Captain 2004), Kerala has 102 species (Palot & Radhakrishnan 2011). Family Elapidae is represented by 17 species in six genera in India, out of which seven species in four genera are known from Kerala. Among the five species of coral snakes known to occur in India, four belong to the genus Calliophis and all these are found in peninsular India (Deepak et al. 2010)

and all the four species are known from Kerala too. They are Calliophis beddomei, C. bibroni, C. nigrescens and C. melanurus (Palot & Radhakrishnan 2011).

Present observation During the course of the ongoing herpetological survey in the KAU campus we discovered a Slender Coral Snake Calliophis melanurus on 16 June 2011.

The specimen has a total length of 155mm, including the tail length of 15mm. This is much smaller than the total length measurements given in Smith (1943), indicating that it was probably a juvenile individual.

The morphometric details of the snake including the scalation are given in Table 1. The scalation details of Slender Coral Snake obtained from KAU campus were compared with the scalation details for the Slender Coral Snake given in Smith (1943) and Whitaker & Captain (2004). The KAU

Figure 1. Location map of KAU campus, Vellanikkara, Thrissur 33

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

Image 1. Google Map of KAU campus Vellanikkara

specimen has 38 subcaudal scales and based on this it can be concluded that it was a male individual. The GPS readings of the location from where the specimen was obtained are 76016’45.4”E and 10032’46.6”N, at an altitude of 43m.

Description Slender Coral Snake is an extremely slender bodied, mildly venomous snake with smooth scales (Images 2 & 3). The head and neck black, back light brown, tail brown with two black rings, one at the base and other near the tip of the tail, under side coral red. The snake when disturbed raised and coiled the tail.

Distribution Smith (1943) gives the distribution range of Slender Coral Snake from Bengal, Nagpur, Bombay, Dharwar, Malabar, Coimbatore, Anamalais and Sri Lanka.

Molur & Walker (1998), give the distribution range of Calliophis melanurus as

Maharastra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal.

Whitaker & Captain (2004) give the Slender Coral Snakes definite records from Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal.

There is a single record from Dhar, Madhya Pradesh (Vyas & Vyas 1981) and Nallamala,

Table 1. A comparison on the scalation of Slender Coral Snake obtained from KAU campus, compared with that of Whitaker & Captain (2004)

total length

KAU specimen

Smith, (1943); Whitaker & Captain (2004)

155mm

335mm

tail length

15mm

22mm

body scale

13:13:13

13:13:13

ventrals

251

249-277

subcaudal

38

33-37 (male); 24-27 (female)

preocular

touches nasal

touches nasal

postocular

two

two

supra labials

6 (3rd and 4th touching eye)

6 (3rd and 4th touching eye)

anal scale

divided

divided

subcaudals

paired

paired

34

Image 1. Dorsal view of Slender Coral Snake from KAU campus, Vellanikkara, June 2011

northern Andhra Pradesh (Sharma 1971; Sanyal et al.

1993). Recently Guptha & Rajasekhar (2011) reported Calliophis melanurus from the Eastern Ghats.

Thus the present record of the Calliophis melanurus from the Kerala Agricultural University campus, Vellanikkara, Thrissur District, in Kerala is of interest. As this is the first record of this species from south of the Palghat Gap, Western Ghats.

All other published records of this species were from north of Palghat Gap. References

Guptha, B.M. & M. Rajasekhar (2011). Sighting of Slender Coral Snake Calliophis melanurus in Seshachalam Hills, Eastern Ghats, India: a new record. Reptile Rap 12: 5–6.

Palot, M.J. & C. Radhakrishnan (2011). An updated checklist of reptiles of Kerala. Malabar Trogon 9: (1&2): 24–30.

Molur, S. & S. Walker (eds.)

(1998). Report of the workshop “Conservation Assessment and Management Plan for Reptiles of India” (BCPP-Endangered Species Project), Zoo Outreach Organisation, Conservation

Breeding Specialist Group, India, Coimbatore, India.

175pp.

Sanyal, D.P., B. Dattagupta & N.C. Gayen (1993).

Reptilia, pp. 1–63. In: Ghosh, A.K. (ed.). Fauna of Andhra Pradesh—Part 1. (Reptilia, Amphibia, Fishes). Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta.

Sharma, R.C. (1971).

The reptile fauna of the Nagarjunasagar Dam area (Andhra Pradesh, India).

Records of the Zoological Survey of India 63(1–4):77– 93.

Smith, M.A. (1943). The fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma including the whole of the Indo-Chinese Subregion.

Reptilia and Amphibia, Vol. III. Serpents. Taylor and Francis, London.

Vyas, T.P. & M. Vyas (1981).

A note on the Slender Coral Snake, Callophis melanurus.

Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 78: 611–612.

Whitaker, R. & A. Captain (2004). Snakes of India-The Field Guide. Draco Books, Chennai, xiv+481pp.

Acknowledgements We thank the Associate Dean, College of Forestry, KAU for encouragement. We also thank Mr. Sreehari VS for helping in preparing the map.

Image 3. The coral-red coloration of the underside and bluish-grey color of the under tail of the Slender Coral Snake from KAU campus, Vellanikkara, June 2011

Deepak, V., S. Harikrishnan, K. Vasudevan & N.E. Smith (2010).

Redescription of Bibron’s Coral Snake, Calliophis bibroni, Jan, 1858 with notes and new records from south of the Palghat and Shencottah Gaps of the Western Ghats, India.

Hamadryad 35(1): 1-10.

1

REPTILE RAP #14, June 2012

UGC Sponsored Major Research Project on Herpetofauna Project Title: “Herpetofaunal Diversity of Sonitpur District, Assam and Adjacent Arunachal Pradesh India with Special Reference to Ecobiology and Breeding Behaviour of Certain Rare Species” i. Principal Investigator: Dr. Mohini Mohan Borah Ii. Designation: Assistant Professor in Zoology iii. Address: a. Office: Chaiduar College, Gohpur, Sonitpur, Assam 784168 b. Residence: Ward No.-6, Madhya Chatrang, P.O- Gohpur, Sonitpur, Assam 784168 iv. UGC Approve No. & Date: F.No.-39-619/2010(SR) Dt. 12th January 2011. v. Duration of Project: 3 Years w. e. f. 01-02-2011. vi. PI in brief: The proposer of the project did his PhD on the topic “A study on distribution of amphibian fauna of Arunachal Pradesh with special reference to habitat ecology of tadpoles”. He has published 48 papers in different journals and national and international seminars. He has completed a UGC sponsored MRP on the topic “Exploration of aquatic fauna of Sonitpur District, Assam with emphasis on conservation measures” the result of which would be additional value of the proposed project. He has constant touch with famous herpetologists of the country and abroad. As these, he achieved a significant milestone in organising a programme at his own college on 07 may 2008 on the occasion of International Year of Frog, 2008 by the gracious participation of Prof. Dr. Annemarie Ohler, Curator of reptiles and amphibians, Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France and Dr. Stephans Grosjean, Assistant Professor of the same institute. The proposer is one of the contributor of the book “ Threatened Amphibians of the World ” published by, LYNX, Spain in 2008. vii. Executive summery of the ongoing Project: The northeastern region of India along with eastern Himalaya is recognized as one of the global bio-diversity hotspot region of the world. The eastern Himalayan region is unique in all aspects of bio-diversity, ecosystem, topography, climate and anthropological diversity. The region is a gateway to the Indian region for migration from Myanmar, China, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan etc. Major portion of the region is still largely inaccessible and less degraded ecologically than the main land of India, but is rather extremely fragile, vulnerable and falls under the highly seismic zone. The National Conservation Strategy, 1992, outlines the policy action required to give greater attention to biodiversity conservation. The present study area ,i.e , Sonitpur District of Assam occupies 5,324km2 bordered with state of Arunachal Pradesh in the north and river Brahmaputra in the south. Though the study area comprises a significant portion of eastern Himalayan hotspot of biodiversity, and yet it is one amongst the least known. Various wild life surveys in the last decade mention mainly on mammals and birds. The reptilian species diversity in the present study site is still not fully understood except very few sporadic survey reports.

Many of the checklist of amphibian and reptilian species of northeastern India need further authentication and many new species of Indo-Chinese elements are likely to occur. The aim of this ongoing project is to make a detailed investigation on amphibian and reptilian habitat of Sonitpur District of Assam and adjacent Arunachal Pradesh. A few physico-chemical parameter will be analysed in the diversed habitats of amphibians and reptilians of study site.

The inhabitants over the years acquired unique knowledge about the use of amphibian and reptilian species as food, medicine and ornaments. A detailed ethnomedicozoological study may highlight various applications of animal species and could provide a scope of knowledge for developing indigenous economy and environmental security.

The year 2008 has been declared as International Year of Frog because of their key role in ecological communities.

They are considered as important bioindicators of global climatic chang. Significant declines and apparent extinctions among numerous species were noted by researchers all over the world since 1980. The pressure on amphibian and reptilian habitat can be recorded only when detailed investigations on ecology, food habit , biology and taxonomic study is available. Study of distributional pattern or zoogeography of a species provides information on ranges of their natural distribution and boundaries that help to find out the endemic status of a species. The use of different species of frogs, lizards, tortoises, snake etc. by a indigenous people as food and medicine indicate its potential for economic and academic importance. viii. Significance of the study: Initially any research and developmental programme survey and demarcation are basic necessities to be carried out in the beginning. Scientific knowledge on biodiversity in general and herpeto fauna in particular of the Sonitpur District is surprisingly deficient. Most of the area in the district is unique ecologically and faunastically. Another important consideration is a great variation in relationship of people to biodiversity and ecosystem which are social, economic, cultural and scientific importance. This project will help in bringing out first hand information and resources data base on the various aspects of biological studies on the lesser known herpetofauna of Sonitpur district of Assam and adjacent Arunachal Pradesh.

The results of the project may provide useful information to the researchers, various state government departments, NGO’s, Indian Council of Medical Research, IUCN, Species Survival Group (SSG), Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Declining Amphibian Population Task Force (DAPTF), Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS), Zoo Outreach Organization (ZOO), Forest Research Institutes, Universities, Local entrepreneurs, etc.

36