CoP17 Prop. 38

Inclusion of False Tomato Frog Dyscophus guineti and Antsouhy Tomato Frog
D. insularis in Appendix II
Proponent: Madagascar
Summary: The False Tomato Frog Dyscophus guineti and the Antsouhy Tomato Frog D. insularis comprise
two of three species in the genus Dyscophus, all of which are endemic to Madagascar. The third species, D.
antongilii was included in Appendix I in 1987. It is subject to a separate proposal to be transferred fromAppendix I to Appendix II (Proposal 37). All three are attractive red-orange coloured frogs.
Dyscophus are known to breed explosively with the availability of water during the rainy season (typicallyJanuary-March) and during that time they can be found in abundance at breeding sites. Hundreds of eggs
are laid in water following mating.
Dyscophus guineti
The known distribution of D. guineti includes a number of patches in the remnant central eastern rainforest ofMadagascar. The species is secretive and believed likely to be more widespread than records indicate1.
Overall population is unknown; locally the species can vary from extremely common to very rare1. Sexual
maturity is attained between two and four years, comparatively earlier in males than in females2.
The habitat of the species is affected by conversion of forest to agriculture, timber extraction, charcoal
production and potentially small-scale mining activities. The species reportedly does not tolerate severe
degredation1. There is not known to be local use of the species.
As a consequence of the Appendix-I listing in 1987 of the similar Dyscophus antongilii, collectors interested
in "red Dyscophus" have shifted their attention to D. guineti which is now collected for export3. USA trade
data indicate that the USA imported some 5300 live wild D. guineti from Madagascar in the period 2004 to2013 with average annual imports higher at the start of this period than at the end (ca. 780 annually for 2004
to 2007; ca. 360 annually for 2008 to 2013)5. Madagascan export data indicate an increase in numbers
exported and number of importing countries in recent years, from ca. 150 exported to three countries in 2013
to 2400 exported to 11 countries in in 2015. In recent years the USA has reported the export of significant
numbers of captive-bred individuals5.
There is a lack of evidence regarding the impact of harvest for trade on D. guineti. The species is reported
mainly to be harvested in one area (around Fierenana). Populations there have been said to have been
affected by harvest3, although the view has also been expressed that levels of harvest, at least in 2008, were
too low to have a serious impact on populations1.
The species is classified in the IUCN Red List as Least Concern (2016).
Dyscophus insularis
This species has a wide distribution throughout western Madagascar, from Ambanja to south of Toliara. It
has been suggested that this species could in fact be multiple species based on the wide range of habitats it
occupies and the obvious geographic variation in morphology and colour4. No quantitative information on thepopulation size in the wild could be found, but it is reported to be a common species4 and is said to be quite
locally abundant3.
The species is likely to be affected by loss of habitat, although quantitative data are lacking.
According to data from Madagascar, exports of D. insularis have increased in recent years, as is the numberof importing countries. In 2012, Madagascar did not record any exports, whereas in 2015 this had increased
to 720 frogs exported to six countries. The USA reported importing 4,503 wild D. insularis from Madagascar
between 2004 and 2013; exports were generally higher at the beginning of this period but have risen again
somewhat in recent years5. As with D. guineti, the USA has been reporting the export of significant numbersof captive-bred individuals in recent years.
International trade levels are not thought to constitute a major factor affecting the species4. The species isclassified in the IUCN Red List as Least Concern (2016).

1

CoP17 Prop. 38
Both species are protected under national legislation (Decree 2006-400) which allows harvest outside ofprotected areas with authorisation.
Both species, particularly Dyscophus guineti, resemble D. antongili3, 6.
Analysis:
Dyscophus guineti
Dyscophus guineti has a wide distribution, and although the population size and trend are not known, it isreported to be at least locally abundant. Recorded levels of trade for the international pet market are
relatively low, although have been reported as increasing recently. Individuals captive-bred outside the range
State appear to meet at least some of the demand for the species. A possible decline has been reported
from the main collection site but this is likely to represent only a small part of the range of the species. It
seems unlikely that the species meets the criteria for inclusion in Appendix II in Annex 2 a of Res. Conf. 9.24
(Rev. CoP16).
Dyscophus insularis
Dyscophus insularis has a wide distribution and although the population size is not known, it is said to becommon. As with D. guineti recorded levels of trade for the international pet market are relatively low,
although have been reported as increasing recently. Individuals captive-bred outside the range State appear
to meet at least some of the demand for the species. It seems unlikely that the species meets the criteria forinclusion in Appendix II in Annex 2 a of Res. Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16) (lookalike criteria).
Both species, particularly D. guineti, resemble D. antongilii which is already listed in the Appendices, andtherefore both species meet the criteria for inclusion in Appendix II under Annex 2 b of Res. Conf. 9.24 (Rev.
CoP16). If this proposal and Proposal 37 (to transfer D. antongilii to Appendix II) were accepted it will havethe effect of placing the entire genus in Appendix II.
Reviewers: M. D. Kusrini, C. Ratsimbazafy.
References:
Information not referenced in the Summary section is from the Supporting Statement.
1 IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group (2016) Dyscophus guineti. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016.

View on 6th July 2016.
2 Tessa, G., Guarino, F.M., Randrianirina, J.E. & Andreone, F. (2011) Age structure in the false tomato frog Dyscophus
guineti from eastern Madagascar compared to the closely related D. antongilii (Anura, Microhylidae), African Journal ofHerpetology, 60:84-88.
3 Andreone, F. (2016) In litt. to the IUCN/TRAFFIC Analyses Team, Cambridge, UK.
4 IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group (2016) Dyscophus insularis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016.
Viewed on 6th July 2016.
5 Analysis of US Fish & Wildlife Service Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) data, May 2016.
6 Ratsimbazafy, C. (2016) In litt. to the IUCN/TRAFFIC Analyses Team, Cambridge, UK.

2