Ranitomeya benedicta 

Scope: Global
Language: English

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Amphibia Anura Dendrobatidae

Scientific Name: Ranitomeya benedicta Brown, Twomey, Pepper, & Sanchez Rodriguez, 2008
Common Name(s):
English Blessed Poison Frog
Taxonomic Source(s): Frost, D.R. 2013. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 5.6 (9 January 2013). Electronic Database. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. Available at: http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html.
Taxonomic Notes: This species was formerly classified as Ranitomeya fantastica (Brown et al. 2008).

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Vulnerable B1ab(iii,v) ver 3.1
Year Published: 2014
Date Assessed: 2013-06-14
Assessor(s): IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group
Reviewer(s): Luedtke, J.
Contributor(s): Pascual Cuadras, A., Angulo, A., Roelke, C., Brown , J. & Cox, N.A.
Facilitator/Compiler(s): Angulo, A. & Jarvis, L.
Listed as Vulnerable because of its estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) of 19,000 km², considered to occur in six threat-defined locations, and there being a continuing decline in the area and quality of its habitat in northeastern Peru, as well as a decline in the number of mature individuals due to harvesting for the international pet trade.
Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:This species is distributed throughout the lowland forests of Pampas del Sacramento, in San Martín and Loreto regions, northeastern Peru (Brown et al. 2008, Brown et al. 2011). The Pampas del Sacramento are bound by the Cordillera Azul and Río Huallaga to the west, Río Ucayali to the east, and the flooded forests of Pacaya-Samiria to the north (J.L. Brown and E. Twomey pers. comm. July 2011). Its extent of occurrence (EOO), taking into account both known and projected sites, is estimated to be 19,000 km² (but note that the depicted range refers to known sites, calculated at 8,304 km2), and it is considered to occur in six threat-defined locations (J.L. Brown pers. comm. July 2011). It can be found at elevations between 150–405 m asl (Brown et al. 2008).
Countries occurrence:
Additional data:
Number of Locations:6
Lower elevation limit (metres):150
Upper elevation limit (metres):405
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:It appears to be widely distributed yet difficult to find in the lowland forests of the Pampas del Sacramento (Brown et al. 2008). For example, von May et al. (2008) reported that 14 individuals were found over the course of 68 person/days in 2008. It seems to have a patchy distribution, but in some areas it seems to be locally abundant (Brown et al. 2008). It appears to live in fragmented habitat patches and the species is considered to have a poor dispersal ability (J.L. Brown pers. comm. February 2013). It is suspected, based on its association with arboreal habitat, that some of the subpopulations may be undergoing declines due to human-induced deforestation (J.L. Brown pers. comm. February 2013).
Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Continuing decline of mature individuals:Yes

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:It inhabits only older secondary and primary lowland rainforests (J.L. Brown and E. Twomey pers. comm. July 2011). It is often found around fallen trees and tangled branches (J.L. Brown and E. Twomey pers. comm. July 2011), and anecdotal reports have suggested that this species may be highly arboreal: farmers and loggers report this species leaping from bromeliads when trees are felled (Brown et al. 2008). It is diurnal and, at least partially, a terrestrial species, where reproduction (clutches of 4–6 eggs) has been observed within the humid leaf litter. Tadpoles are then transported to water-filled bromeliads, where they complete development (Brown et al. 2008). It is not found in areas disturbed by human activity (Brown et al. 2008).
Systems:Terrestrial; Freshwater
Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat:Yes

Use and Trade [top]

Use and Trade: This species was smuggled for the international pet trade in 2007 and 2008 and legally exported in 2009 by Understory Enterprises (J.L. Brown and E. Twomey pers. comm. July 2011; J.L. Brown pers. comm. August 2011).

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s): It occurs in areas that are being actively farmed and logged, primarily for subsistence farming, logging and agroindustry (J.L. Brown pers. comm. July 2011), which will reduce the amount of suitable habitat substantially over the coming years (Brown et al. 2008). While it appears that much of its habitat is undisturbed, it is estimated that between 5–15% of subpopulations are currently being impacted by human-induced deforestation, possibly leading to slow declines (J.L. Brown pers. comm. July 2011, February 2013). In addition, it has recently (2007) been illegally exported for the international pet trade, with legally-acquired individuals recorded in 2009 (J.L. Brown and E. Twomey pers. comm. July 2011). The projection that there will be a high demand for this species in the pet trade (Brown et al. 2008) seems to be confirmed in the area surrounding Shucushuyacu, where smuggling pressure has increased considerably, to such an extent that no individuals have been seen in the wild in this area since the species was described (J.L. Brown pers. comm. July 2011). It is suspected that local inhabitants may be felling trees to collect these frogs for the black market, impacting not only this species but others that share the same environment (J.L. Brown pers. comm. July 2011).

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions: It is not known to occur in any protected areas, and given land use change and habitat loss, habitat protection is needed. Its range does overlap with Cordillera Azul National Park, but its presence here needs to be verified. More information is needed on this species' distribution, population status and level of trade, and legislation and enforcement of legislation are needed to address the issue of illegal trade. CITES does not recognize Ranitomeya benedicta and R. summersi as separate species, so they are treated as subpopulations of Dendrobates fantasticus in Appendix II of CITES.

Classifications [top]

1. Forest -> 1.6. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland
suitability:Suitable season:resident major importance:Yes
0. Root -> 17. Other
suitability:Suitable season:breeding major importance:Yes
1. Land/water protection -> 1.2. Resource & habitat protection
5. Law & policy -> 5.2. Policies and regulations
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.1. International level
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.2. National level

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Occur in at least one PA:Unknown
In-Place Species Management
In-Place Education
  Subject to any international management/trade controls:Yes
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.2. Small-holder farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.3. Agro-industry farming
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.1. Intentional use (species is the target)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Very Rapid Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 7 
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

5. Biological resource use -> 5.3. Logging & wood harvesting -> 5.3.1. Intentional use: (subsistence/small scale) [harvest]
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.2. Harvest level trends

♦  Pets/display animals, horticulture
 International : ✓ 

Bibliography [top]

Brown, J. L., Twomey, E., Amezquita, A., de Souza, M. B., Caldwell, J. P., Lotters, S., von May, R., Melo-Sampaio, P. R., Mejia-Vargas, D., Perez-Pena, P., Pepper, M., Poelman, E. H., Sanchez-Rodriguez, M., and Summers, K. 2011. A taxonomic revision of the Neotropical poison frog genus Ranitomeya (Amphibia: Dendrobatidae). Zootaxa 3083: 1-120.

Brown, J.L., Twomey, E., Pepper, M. and Sanchez Rodriguez, M. 2008. Revision of the Ranitomeya fantastica species complex with description of two new species from Central Peru (Anura: Dendrobatidae). Zootaxa 1823: 1-24.

IUCN. 2014. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 12 June 2014).

von May, R., Catenazzi, A., Angulo, A., Brown, J.L., Carrillo, J., Chávez, G., Córdova, J.H., Curo, A., Delgado, A., Enciso, M.A., Guttiérez, R., Lehr, E., Martínez, J.L., Martina-Müller, M., Miranda, A., Neira, D.R., Ochoa, J.A., Quiroz, A.J., Rodríguez, D.A., Rodríguez, L.O., Salas, A.W., Seimon, T., Seimon, A., Siu-Ting, K., Suárez, J., Torres, C. and Twomey, E. 2008. Current state of conservation knowledge on threatened amphibian species in Peru. Tropical Conservation Science 1(4): 376-396.

Citation: IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group. 2014. Ranitomeya benedicta. In: . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2014: e.T193431A43529004. . Downloaded on 21 June 2018.
Disclaimer: To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback: If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided