/Reptile_Rap_13_Sep2011 by ZOO-WILD

Reptile Rap Newsletter of the South Asian Reptile Network

No.13 | September 2011

ISSN 2230-7079

Date of publication: 21 September 2011

Contents Reptilian fauna of agricultural landscapes of Chembarambakkam Lake, Chennai, Tamil Nadu -- Chime Tsetan & R. Ramanibai, Pp. 2–8 Snakes of Bongaigaon Municipality Area, Assam, India -- Anukul Nath, Hilloljyoti Singha & Abhijit Das, Pp. 9–13 Recent records of the Asian Giant Softshell Turtle Pelochelys cantorii (Gray) (Chelonia: Trionychidae) in northern Kerala, southern India -- Muhamed Jafer Palot & C. Radhakrishnan, Pp. 14–16 www.zoosprint.org/Newsletters/ReptileRap.htm

OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

Reptilian fauna of agricultural landscapes of Chembarambakkam Lake, Chennai, Tamil Nadu Chime Tsetan 1 & R. Ramanibai 2 Aquatic Biodiversity Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Madras, Guindy Campus, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600025, India Email: 2 rramani8@hotmail.com (corresponding author)

1,2

India being one of the top 12 mega-biodiversity countries of the world, boasts a rich herpetofauna with 299 amphibian species (Dinesh & Radhakrishnan 2009) and 506 reptiles (Das 2003). In India, reptiles are threatened by many causes, the main among them is the illegal trade in spite of Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (Molur et al. 1998). This involves pet trades and the poaching of snakes, turtles, monitor lizards etc. for their skin, meat

and bones. Some reptiles are used for traditional medicinal purposes (Mahawar & Jaroli 2008). Reptiles occupy a diverse range of habitats and microhabitats, i.e., they are found from deserts to grasslands, from forests to oceans and from hills to our own houses. Tamil Nadu with its diversity in ecosystems has a very good potential to support numerous reptiles, especially snakes (Daniels 2001). As such, a few

Image 1. Chembarambakkam Lake location 2

studies have been carried out on reptiles in Chennai and its neighboring districts of Chengalpattu-MGR, Kanchipuram, Thiruvellore, Kolli Hills, Mannampandal and Nagapattinam districts, the Western Ghats of Tamil Nadu namely Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary and Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve (Kalairasan 1999; Aengals 1999, Kumar 1999, Kalaiarasan 2000; Daniels 2001, Ganesh & Mouli 2007). This study was to survey the distribution and diversity of reptiles in the areas around Chembarambakkam agricultural landscapes. Study Area Chembarambakkam Lake (1300’32.69’’N & 8003’36.88’’E) (Image 1) is situated about 25km southwest of Chennai beach and the lake is fed by

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011 two major water channels running through Chennai City, that is, Adyar and Cooum. The lake covers an area of 357km2 with its catchment and the 9km lake bund was once a major source of drinking water (Daniels & Rajagopal 2004). The area lies near one of the large fresh water bodies near Chennai City managed by the public works department; it is free of encroachments and pollution. The lake also serves as an irrigational water source for neighboring fields with numerous water outlets in the form of sluice gates and small water channels. The present study was primarily focused on the east face of Chembarambakkam Lake close to the road which joins the NH-4 and Sri Perumbudur Highway. A short stretch of Sri Perumbudur Highway (800m) outside Kunrathur forms the collection site of road-kills. In the National Wetland Conservation Programme (NWCP), 115 wetlands have been identified in India and in Ramsar convention of wetland conservation, 25 spots in India fall under its list of important international wetlands. Though not in the list, Chembarambakkam Lake and its flanking areas (wetlands) constitute diverse groups of local flora and fauna especially in fishes and aquatic birds (Daniels & Rajagopal 2004). A few studies on the reptiles of Chembarambakkam Lake have been carried out, there by providing a good source of data on their diversity and

distribution. The climate of Chembarambakkam Lake area is tropical wet and dry, with a hot dry summer season prevailing during the months from March to June. The monsoon season is from July to October and the warm winter from November to March. A few studies have been done on the reptiles of the area as compared to fishes and birds of Chembarambakkam. This survey will provide a base for further studies

for easy analysis in future. Dodd (2003) has classified the sampling methods into three groups: active sampling, easy passive sampling, and intensive passive sampling. The latter two involve designing and laying traps for the target species, for example, making cover-boards, PVC pipe refugias, drift fences etc. The trapping method though efficient was unfeasible in this survey because of the size of the survey field, the long gaps between field visits, and the possibilities of traps getting stolen or damaged by other grazing animals. Active sampling was carried out for this survey and the method involved is quadrant survey. Quadrant survey: It is almost the same as transects but instead of walking a path length, quadrant involves surveying a sampling area. Sizes of the sampling area can be variable based upon the habitat type. For example, in forests the quadrant area must be kept small (10 X 10 m) whereas in open fields the area can be kept larger (20

Methods Before the initiation of the actual reptile survey, a list of microhabitats, which were found in the landscapes, was prepared. Along with the reptile, the microhabitat in which it was found was noted, with the time for analysis of the reptileâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s microhabitat preference, spatial distribution etc. The microhabitats were as follows (Table 1): 1. On walls or buildings 2. Inside Burrows 3. Under rocks and other debris 4. Less than 2m high on tree or bush Table 2. Microhabitat preferences 5. More than 2m high on by Lizards tree or bush. Micro Habitats Lizards 6. Near water On Walls/buildings 13 7. In water Burrow 0 8. Open ground These microhabitats along with the major habitat, times for the start and end of the survey, weather conditions etc. were formulated into a data sheet for use in the field 3

Under rock/debris

< 2m on tree/bush

> 2m on tree/bush

Near water

In water

Open ground

125 Total

231

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

Image 2. Chembarambakkam landscape showing location of the snakes observed during the study period

X 20 m). In this survey, a quadrant size of 20 X 20 m was used as most of the habitats were open land or lake bund with mild vegetation. Target species encountered within these quadrants were noted down along with the time and the microhabitat in which they were found. Sloughs were collected and documented (see transect section) (Image 2). Photographs were taken for documentation and in case of unidentified species, for identification. Handling of dangerous animals like venomous snakes was avoided altogether. Observation During the study a total of 278 reptiles were encountered which included live animals, road kills and sloughs. Twenty-two different species belonging to two orders

(Squamata and Testudines), nine families and 19 genera of reptiles were documented from the Chembarambakkam Lake area (Table 2). This included live individuals as well as road kills and sloughs collected. Out of 22 species reported, 20 species were at lower risk, for one species Lycodon aulicus (Linnaeus, 1758) the data was deficient and one species Varanus bengalensis (Daudin, 1802) was vulnerable. Microhabitat usage: Only live individuals were considered for assessing the microhabitat usage by each group of these reptiles. Sloughs and road kills were discarded for this assessment. Around 54% of the lizards observed were found in the open ground (either foraging or basking). Sitana ponticeriana and Eutropis carinata showed 4

high affinity towards open ground microhabitat, but nevertheless stayed close to some bush clumps or rock debris for quick retreat. Twenty-six percent of lizards preferred trees or bushes, especially Calotes versicolor. This species was seen on the ground only to forage for ants or to bask. 15% (mostly geckoes and few skinks) were found sheltering under rocks and other debris. Hemidactylus brookii was the chief occupant of this microhabitat and two Lygosoma punctata were found under rock debris. Discussion A total of 30 quadrant surveys was carried out in this present study for the collection of data. During the study a total of 278 reptiles were encountered. Among the squamates, agamids

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011 Table 1. Checklist of reptile species found in Chembarambakkam landscape SNo

Species Name

Common Name

Snakes 1

Ahaetulla nasuta (Lacepede, 1789)

Common Vine Snake

Atretium schistosum (Daudin, 1803)

Olivaceous Keelback

Bungarus caeruleus (Schneider, 1801)

Common Krait

Coelognathus Helena (Daudin, 1803)

Trinket Snake

Daboia russelii (Shaw & Nodder, 1797)

Russell’s Viper

Dendrelaphis tristis (Daudin, 1803)

Common Bronzeback Tree Snake

Gongylophis conicus (Schneider, 1801)

Common Sand Boa

Lycodon aulicus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Common Wolf Snake

Naja naja (Linnaeus, 1758)

Spectacled Cobra

Oligodon arnensis (Shaw, 1802)

Common Kukri Snake

Ptyas mucosus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Common Rat Snake

Xenochrophis piscator (Schneider, 1799)

Checkered Keelback

Lizards 13

Calotes versicolor (Daudin,1802)

Indian Garden Lizard (Images 1 & 2)

Hemidactylus brooki (Gray, 1845)

Spotted Indian House Gecko (Image 3)

Hemidactylus frenatus (Dum. & Bib., 1836)

Southern House Gecko (Image 4)

Lygosoma punctata (Gmelin,1799)

Dotted Garden Skink (Image 5)

Eutropis bibronii (Gray,1838)

Sand Skink (Image 6)

Eutropis carinata (Schneider, 1801)

Common Skink (Image 7)

Eutropis macularia (Blyth, 1853)

Bronze Grass Skink

Sitana ponticeriana (Cuvier, 1844)

Fan-throated Lizard (Images 8–10 )

Varanus bengalensis (Daudin, 1802)

Common Indian Monitor (Images 11 & 12)

Turtle 22

Lissemys punctata (Lacépède, 1788)

including Sitana ponticeriana and Calotes versicolor, formed the most common and abundant species. Also the family Scincidae with its four different species were next in abundance after agamids. A few geckos and only one varanus were observed. In Serpentes, the maximum diversity was 12 different species of snakes recorded from the area. Rat Snake Ptyas mucosus was most abundant and of others only a few individuals were sighted. Sloughs or shedded skins of the snakes were found to be useful for detecting the presence of snakes in the

Indian Flapshell Turtle (Image 13)

given area. Sloughs and faecal pellets (scat) of snakes can be taken as secondary signs of the presence of otherwise cryptic snakes. Intact sloughs can be used for the identification of the snake species down to its genus level by careful examination of scale counts (Smith 1943; Daniel 2002). For example, in the present study, the common wolf-snakes were documented only with their sloughs. A well planned survey with good human resources and good input will surely yield better results with reliable data on diversity and distribution. 5

As such, the future scope of studies in the same field with inclusion of prey and predator relationships among reptiles, reptile breeding, human impact like agricultural practices, on the reptile diversity and distribution still stands. Reptiles, especially snakes are in crisis due to people’s poor knowledge of these creatures, influenced by superstitious beliefs. To protect these animals, education of the general public regarding their biology, ecological value and eradication of associated myths must take front stage. Implementation of stringent

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

Images 1 & 2. Indian Garden Lizard Calotes versicolor male (left) female (right)

Image 3. Spotted Indian House Gecko Hemidactylus brooki

Image 5. Dotted Garden Skink Lygosoma punctata

Image 4. Southern House Gecko Hemidactylus frenatus

Image 6. Sand Skink Eutropis bibroni

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

Image 7. Common Skink Eutropis carinata

Image 8. Fan-throated Lizard Sitana ponticeriana male gular pouch

Image 9 & 10. Fan-throated Lizard Sitana ponticeriana male (left) female (right)

Image 11 & 12. Common Indian Monitor Varanus bengalensis

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

Image 13. Indian Flapshell Turtle Lissemys punctata

laws against those who violate and illegally manipulate the laws must be followed. References Aengals, R. (1999). Studies on the ecology of common Arboreal and land snakes in scrub jungle forests of Chengalpattu-MGR District, Tamil Nadu. Cobra 35 & 36: 18–24. Molur, S., P.O. Nameer & 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. Daniel, J.C. (2002). The Book of Indian Reptiles and Amphibians. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 235pp. Daniels, R.J.R. (2001). Snakes of Tamil Nadu: a status report. Cobra 44: 11–17. Daniels, R.J.R. & B. Rajagopal (2004). Fishes of Chembarampakkam Lake a wetland in the outskirts of Chennai. Zoos’ Print Journal 19(5): 1481–1483. 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. Dinesh, K.P., C. Radhakrishnan, K.V. Gururaja, K. Deuti & G.K. Bhatta (2009). A Checklist of Amphibia of India. Newsletter of Zoological Survey of India 138–139. Ganesh, S.R. & S.R.C. Mouli (2007). A Study of the

herpetofaunal community in Mannampandal, Nagapatinam District, Tamil Nadu. Cobra 1(4): 33–43. Kalaiarasan, V. (1999). The Community structure of reptiles in the scrub jungle forests in Chengal-MGR and Madras Districts. Cobra 35 & 36: 29–30. Kumar, M.V.R. (1999). Reptiles of Kesarkulli Dam, Dharmapuri District. Cobra 38: 6–11. Mahawar, M.M. & D.P. Jaroli (2008). Traditional zootherapeutic studies in India: a review. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 4: 17. 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.

Acknowledgements The authors thank Care Earth Trust for the technical support and guidance provided during the study.

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

Snakes of Bongaigaon Municipality Area, Assam, India Anukul Nath 1, Hilloljyoti Singha 2 & Abhijit Das 3 Aaranyak, 50, Samanwoy Path, Survey, P.O. Beltola, Guwahati, Assam 781028, India 1 Department of Wildlife Biology, A.V.C. College (Autonomous), Mannampandal, Tamilnadu 609305, India 2 Centre for Biodiversity & Natural Resources Conservation, Assam University, Silchar, Assam 788011, India Email: 1 anucool.nath5 @gmail.com, 2 hilloljyoti.singha@gmail.com (corresponding author), 3 protobothrops@gmail.com 1,2,3

India is home to 275 species of snakes (Whitaker & Captain 2004) of which 102 species have been so far recorded from northeastern India (Ahmed et al. 2009). Snakes have adapted themselves to almost all kinds of landscapes from aquatic to the high altitudes of the Himalayas including urban areas and a few species have become human commensal. With their presence being almost everywhere, snakes are frequently found in human habitations, both in villages and towns: leading to a serious human-snake conflict. Besides, snakebite is a major medical hazard in India and it has been estimated that as many as 20,000 to 40,000 people die per year from snake bites (Das 2002). Snakes have been used as a suitable model to investigate certain ecological questions (Shine & Bonnet 2000). It is thus important to know the cause of snake occurrence in human habitation with additional information on seasonal occurrence, microhabitat preference and relative abundance. Although a few (Urfi 1999; Vyas 1987a,b; Urfi 2005) studies have

been reported, particularly from western India, no such report hitherto existed from northeastern India. Thus the present study was conducted to record the incidence of rescued snakes in the Bongaigaon Municipality Area (BMA) with notes on natural history. This is also a record of snakes in an urban area and a conservation initiative for snakes. Materials and Methods Study Area: We rescued snakes in the Bongaigaon Municipality Area (90028’– 90050’E & 26015’–26030’N) in Bongaigaon District, western Assam. Though the area is totally urbanized, it is also covered by mixed plantations as well as natural, moist deciduous vegetation along with a few patches of semievergreen forest types. Besides, there is Bagheswari Hill and the Birjhora tea gardens in the eastern boundary of the town. It is inhabited by 60,550 people (2001 census). Methods: Snakes were rescued during September 2007 to May 2009 from different locations in BMA as 9

and when we were informed about their straying into residential areas. The snakes were captured using hooked aluminum sticks and immediately transferred into cloth bags (after Whitaker 1970). The length of the snake, location & different human habitations (inside the house, in the courtyard or inside a shop), time and date were noted. Species identification was done following Daniel (2002), Das (2002) and Whitaker & Captain (2004). The snakes were released back to the nearest suitable habitat. We categorized November to February as winter season, March to June as premonsoon and July to October as monsoon season. Chisquare test was performed to find the significant difference between the number of nonvenomous and venomous snakes rescued, and to find the difference in the number of snakes rescued in different habitats and different seasons. Results We rescued 26 individuals belonging to three families, seven genera and eight species (Table 1). Out of these, Naja naja, N. kaouthia and Bungarus fasciatus were venomous species. Two Python bivittatus were rescued. Among the rescued snakes, Xenochrophis piscator was highest in number (38.4%). Significantly more non-venomous snakes were rescued than venomous

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011 Table 1. Rescued snake species in Bongaigaon Municipality Area (BMA) from September 2007 to May 2009. Species

No. of Snakes

Avg. length ± SD (in cm)

Time of rescue Day (0600– 1800 hr)

Night (1800– 0600 hr)

108 ± 33.94

50 ± 11.74

Boidae 1

Burmese Python Python bivittatus (Image 1) Colubridae

Common Wolf Snake Lycodon aulicus (Image 2)

Copper-headed Trinket Snake Coelognathus radiatus (Image 3)

116 ± 65

Indian Rat Snake Ptyas mucosa (Image 4)

159 ± 43.13

Checkered Keelback Xenochrophis piscator (Image 5)

91.2 ± 20.83

Elapidae 6

Banded Krait Bungarus fasciatus (Image 6)

126

Spectacled Cobra Naja naja (Image 7)

69 ± 45.07

Monocled Cobra Naja kaouthia (Image 8)

120

and pre-monsoon seasons (χ2 = 6.32, df = 2, p < 0.05). The highest number of snakes rescued was in August (Fig. 1). Discussion During the 20 months of the study period at least one snake was rescued per month. Though not surveyed, we found at least eight species of snakes in this urban area. Xenochrophis piscator is one of the commonest snakes in India (Daniel 2002; Das 2002), this was also found to be the most relatively abundant snake in BMA. It

Image 1. Burmese Python Python bivittatus

snakes (χ = 8.64, df = 1, p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the number of snakes rescued at different human habitations (inside the house, courtyard and inside shops) (Table 2). Further more, the number of snakes rescued in the monsoons was significantly more than that of the winter 2

Image 2. Common Wolf Snake Lycodon aulicus

about 1m (see Table 1), these two pythons were young individuals, which suggests a breeding population of Python bivittatus might be present in and around Bongaigaon. The number of snakes rescued in the monsoons was significantly more because the majority of the species breed during this season, and usually come into contact with

Image 3. Copper-headed Trinket Snake Coelognathus radiatus

was also reported as the second most common snake rescued from houses and city gardens in Amaravati District, Maharashtra (Nande & Deshmukh 2007). In a similar study, spanning 10 years in Amaravati District, including Melghat Tiger Reserve, Nande & Deshmukh (2007) rescued 32 species belonging to six families of snakes. They used to receive 20 phone calls per day from residents; however, in our case, because of less publicity, we did not receive so many phone calls. There might have been more snakes which went unnoticed in the process. The rescue of Python bivittatus (Schedule-I, Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972) in a district headquarters town is noteworthy; they might have come out from the nearby hills. One of them was rescued from a grocery shop early in the morning and the other was rescued from the Deputy Commissioner’s office. As their length was

Image 4. Indian Rat Sanke Ptyas mucosa

Image 5. Checkered Keelback Xenochrophis piscator 11

cases, non-venomous snakes were found to be the victims in the human-snake conflict. Three harmless snakes (Common Wolf Snake, Copperheaded Trinket Snake, and Indian Rat Snake) had been killed (pers. obs.) before we reached the spot. Lack of awareness was the main reason for the killing. While rescuing the snakes, we also motivated people not to kill snakes instead to inform the concerned authorities, which seemed to create awareness during this period. We also rescued one Indian Rat Snake from a snake charmer, and

Image 6. Banded Krait Bungarus fasciatus

Image 8. Monocled Cobra Naja kaouthia

humans. Snakes were found in close proximity to human settlements irrespective of different microhabitats. Seven individuals of four

non-venomous species and one of venomous species were rescued from houses, initiating human-snake conflict very often. In most 12

subsequently the number of snake charmers reduced.

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011 Table 2. Number of snakes rescued from different human habitations in Bongaigaon Municipality Area from September 2007 to May 2009. Name of the Species

Inside house

Courtyard

Inside Shop

Checkered Keelback

Common Wolf Snake

Copper-headed Trinket Snake

Burmese Python

Indian Rat Snake

Spectacled Cobra

Monocled Cobra

Banded Krait

Number of snakes

5 4 3 2 1 0

J J Months

Figure 1. Number of snakes rescued at different months of years in Bongaigaon Municipality Area from September 2007 to May 2009.

References Ahmed, F., A. Das & S.K. Dutta (2009). Amphibians and Reptiles of northeast India - A Photographic Guide. Aaranyak, Guwahati, India, 169pp. Daniel, J.C. (2002). The Book of Indian Reptiles and Amphibians. Bombay Natural History Society, Oxford University Press, Bombay, India, viii+238pp. Das, I. (2002). A Photographic Guide to Snakes and other

Acknowledgement

Reptiles of India. New Holand Publication, UK, 144pp. Nande, R. & S. Deshmukh (2007). Snakes of Amravati District including Melghat, Maharastra, with important records of the Indian EggEater, Montane Trinket Snake and Indian Smooth Snake. Zoos’ Print Journal 22(12): 2920-2924. Shine, R. & X. Bonnet (2000). Snakes: a new a ‘model organism’ in ecological research? Trends in ecology and Evolution 15: 221–222.

Urfi, A.J. (1999). The snake conservation programme of Sundarvan Nature Discovery Centre, Ahmedabad (Gujarat, India): an evaluation. Zoos’ Print XIV(4):7–10. Urfi, A.J. (2005). Ecology of snakes in an urban environment: an analysis of the data on snakes collected by Sundrvan Nature Discovery Centre, Ahmedabad. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 102(1): 44–49. Vyas, R. (1987). Snake collection data from Bhavnagar City, Gujrat for 1984. Hamadryad 12(1): 3–4. Vyas, R. (1987). A list of the snakes of Bhavanagar District, Gujrat State. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 84(1): 227–230. Whitaker, R & A. Captain (2004). Snakes of India - The Field Guide. Draco Books, Chengalpet, Tamil Nadu, India, 489pp.

We are thankful to Forest Department, Aie Valley Division, Bongaigaon and Nature’s Foster (NGO) for their active cooperation. We would like to offer thanks to Biplab Choudhury, Suman Debnath, Ayan Sarkar and Surajit Saha, students of Birjhora Mahavidyalaya, Bongaigaon for their assistance during the rescues. We would also like to thank Sanjoy Sutradhar and S. Chandramouli for providing various study materials and references during manuscript preparation.

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

Recent records of the Asian Giant Softshell Turtle Pelochelys cantorii (Gray) (Chelonia: Trionychidae) in northern Kerala, southern India

Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Sumatra and Borneo (Das 2008). In India, the species is known mainly from eastern coast in West Bengal, Odisha, Tamil Nadu and Kerala (Moll & Vijaya 1986; Das 1995; Vasudevan 2009). On the west coast of India, the species is known from Kerala, in Thiruvananthapuram District (Nair & Badarudeen 1975), Kannur District (Palot & Radhakrishnan 2002, 2004), Kozhikode District (Palot 2003) and Malappuram District (Bijukumar 2004). Little is known about their status and distribution, natural history, habits and breeding. In 2010, we made three additional records of the species from northern Kerala. The first specimen was caught at Azheekkal (11091’20”N & 75031’95”E) on 6 August 2010. It was a half-grown individual, measuring about 50cm in length. The turtle was caught from the sea mouth of Azheekkal (Kannur District), the estuary of Valapattannam and Kuppam rivers, by local fishermen using fishing net. Subsequently,

Muhamed Jafer Palot 1 & C. Radhakrishnan 2 Zoological Survey of India, Western Ghat Regional Centre, Kozhikode, Kerala 673006, India Email: 1 palot.zsi@gmail.com

1,2

The Asian Giant Softshell Turtle Pelochelys cantorii (Gray, 1864) (Trionychidae), is a little known species from South and South-east Asia. The turtle is characterized by its large size, which can reach 60–100 cm in total carapace length, and depressed shell, small head and short snout. It occurs in a variety of habitats, including lakes, rivers, estuaries, seacoasts, and occasionally, in coastal marine waters. The species is known to occur in Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Laos,

Image1. A dead specimen of Pelochelys cantorii at Kolavipalam Beach, Kozhikode District, Kerala

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011 it was released into the Valapattannam River. The second specimen was recorded from the marine waters of Kolavipalam (11056’54”N & 75059’14”E), Kozhikode District, about 3km from the Kottapuzha estuary of the river Kuttiady on 20 September 2010 (Image 1). The specimen apparently got entangled in the gill nets (thirandi vala; Malayalam) laid for catching Rays (thirandi; Malayalam) by local fishermen. The right hind limb of the turtle was wounded and the cause of death was evidently due to the injury and drowning for long in the 5m deep fishing net. The specimen appeared to be fully grown, about 1m in length. The carapace was olive brown with some distinct patterns on the upper side. The plastron was pale yellow with some rosy tinge on the sides. The head and limbs were also olive brown with light shades on the edges. On 5 October 2010, a smaller specimen was caught in the fishing net in Kuttiady River, about 1km from the sea mouth (Vijayan pers. comm.). The above records show that the species occurs in the estuarine environments of the rivers Valapattannam and Kuttiady in small numbers. Though secretive, the local fishermen of the area are quite familiar with the occurrence of the species in the region, which has been sighted many times from the upstream of Kutttiady River in recent years (Zacharia pers. comm.). In fact, the earlier record (Palot 2003) of the turtle from Chavaramuzhi (11059’90” & 75082’17”) area of the Kuttiady River, which is approximately 40km upstream from the sea mouth and close to the Peruvannamuzhi reservoir, indicates the movement of the species even up to the forested streams of the foothills of Western Ghats. Interestingly, all the estuarine records were during August–October, immediately after the southwest monsoon, probably coinciding with the breeding of the species. All the estuarine localities of Azheekkal and Kolavipalam are known for their lush growth of mangroves and the breeding of Olive Ridley Turtle Lepidochelys olivacea between September and December.

Pelochelys cantorii is currently a threatened species on account of overexploitation for their flesh and habitat destruction. It is listed in the Endangered category of the IUCN Redlist (Asian Turtle Trade Working Group 2000) and in Appendix II of the CITES. It is also listed in Schedule I of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. References Asian Turtle Trade Working Group (2000). Pelochelys cantorii. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 21 September 2011. Bijukumar, A. (2004). Records of Leith’s Softshell Turtle, Aspideretes leithii (Gray, 1872) and Asian Giant Softshell Turtle, Pelochelys cantorii (Gray, 1864) in Bharathapuzha river, Kerala. Zoos’ Print Journal 19(4): 1445. Das, I. (1995). Turtles and Tortoises of India. Oxford University Press. Bombay, 176pp. Das, I. (2008). Pelochelys cantorii Gray, 1864.Aisan Giant Softshell Turtle. In: Rhodin, A.G.J., P.C.H. Pitchard, P.P. vanDijk, R.A. Saumure, K.A. Buhlmann & J.B. Iverson (eds.). Conservation Biology of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: a compilation project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group. Chelonian Research Monographs No.5., pp. 011.1–011.6, doi:10.3854/cm.5.0.11.cantorii. vl.2008. Moll, E.E. & J. Vijaya (1986). Distributional records for some Indian Turtles. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 83(1): 57–62. Palot, M.J. & C. Radhakrishnan 2002. Occurrence of Asian Giant Softshell Turtle, Pelochelys cantorii (Gray, 1864), in northern Kerala. Zoos’ Print Journal 17(4): 770. Palot, M.J. (2003). Occurrence of Asian Giant Softshell Turtle (Pelochelys cantorii) in Kuttiady River, Kozhikode District. Malabar Trogon 1(4): 6. Palot, M.J. & C. Radhakrishnan (2004). Status and distribution of Turtle fauna (Testudines: Reptilia) in the Malabar part of Kerala, India. Records of the Zoological Survey of India 102(Part 1–2): 27–39. Nair, P.N.R. & M. Badarudeen (1975). On the Occurrence of the Softshell Turtle, Pelochelys bibroni (Owen) in the marine environment. Indian Journal of Fisheries 22: 270–274. Vasudevan, K. (ed.) (2009). Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises of India. ENVIS Bulletin: Wildlife 15

s, contact:

odilebank.org

and Conservation) e Bank Trust / Centre for

ocodilebank.org

REPTILE RAP #13, September 2011

e Bank Trust / Centre for

Madras Crocodile Bank Trust

Centre for Herpetology Herpetological Conservation Research Fund Madras Crocodile Bank Trust (MCBT) and Centre for Herpetology (CFH) have been working towards the conservation of herpetofauna since their inception. MCBT/CFH and its associated centres, particularly the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Environmental Team (ANET) offer a wealth of possibilities for research and knowledge-based conservation actions. In its 35th year of operation, MCBT/CFH is proud to announce the initiation of an annual Herpetological Conservation Research Fund of 25,00,000. The primary aim of this Fund is to support and encourage new and exciting research on herpetofauna in India as well as innovative conservation actions. The Fund will also support long-term research initiatives at MCBT/CFH and ANET. Individuals, organisations and students may apply for grants for short-term research and conservation projects as well as Masters and Ph.D. dissertation projects. Grant amounts will vary from 20,000 to 2,00,000 for a period of up to one year. Grant applications and instructions are available on the Madras Crocodile Bank website (www. madrascrocodilebank.org). Grant applications will be reviewed by MCBT/CFH’s Research Advisory Board. Grant applications should be submitted by October 31, 2011. For all queries regarding the grant process, contact:

Ravi Chellam <Ravi@madrascrocodilebank.org>, Director (Research and Conservation), MCBT Gowri Mallapur <Gowri@madrascrocodilebank.org>, Asst. Director, MCBT

and Protected Areas. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India, 177pp.

REPTILE RAP OPEN ACCESS | FREE DOWNLOAD

Date of publication: 21 September 2011

Acknowledgment The authors are grateful to the Director, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkota for facilities and encouragements. Thanks are also due to Shri. C. Sunil Kumar, Chief Photographer, Mathrubhumi Daily, Kannur and Shri. K. Vijayan, Theeram, Kolavipalam, Calicut for sharing the photographs and suport from the field.

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

No. 13 | September 2011

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 Organisation 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 Organisation, 9-A, Lal Bahadur Colony, PB 1683, Peelamedu, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641004, India Ph: +91 422 2561743, 2561087; Fax: +91 422 2563269 Email: herpinvert@gmail.com REPTILE RAP is available online at www.zoosprint.org/Newsletters/ReptileRap.htm 16