Aponogeton satarensis 

Scope: Global
Language: English

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Plantae Tracheophyta Liliopsida Alismatales Aponogetonaceae

Scientific Name: Aponogeton satarensis Sundararagh
Taxonomic Notes: Aponogeton satarensis was described from Mhavashi ferricrete by Sunderaraghavan, Kulkarni and Yadav in 1982.

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Endangered B1ab(ii,iii)+2ab(ii,iii) ver 3.1
Year Published: 2011
Date Assessed: 2010-05-04
Assessor(s): Watve, A.
Reviewer(s): Juffe Bignoli, D., Narasimhan, D., Kumar, V.S., Ravikumar, K. & Rao, M.L.V.
Contributor(s): Molur, S.

Aponogeton satarensis is only known from five sites in small temporary pools on the top of widely separated hill plateaus in the Western Ghats. At one of these sites, some of the temporary pools have been lost due to the construction of windmills however, secondary pools have been created and the species is has colonized these new pools. Another site is threatened by the increase of tourism (botanical amateurs) and litter disposal. Hence, the habitat quality of these sites is degrading due to increased pollution, changes in micro habitats by earth removal, littering and garbage disposal and unintended fires in summer caused by tourists and grazers. Other sites are being claimed for mining of laterite, although no pressures are active at the present except  for grazing, which has been going on for several years.  In the study that was conducted for three years from 2004-2006, decline was not observed although habitat modifications was observed in some of the known localities. Despite this, population decline in the next 10 years is expected due to increasing human pressures on the known sites. The species is assessed as Endangered as it has a restricted area of occupancy and extent of occurrence, and there is an ongoing a decline in habitat quality in most of the known locations.

Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:This species has been reported from Mhavashi (which is the type locality), Kas, Patan ferricretes in Satara district and Gothane ferricrete in the Western Ghats which falls under Ratnagiri district political boundary. The fifth locality is Chalkewadi plateau in Satara district, Maharashtra (A. Watve pers. obs. 2004-2006). It is also known to occur in Amboli area, Maharashtra (S.R. Yadav pers. comm. 2003).
Countries occurrence:
India (Maharashtra)
Additional data:
Estimated area of occupancy (AOO) - km2:3Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO):Yes
Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO):NoEstimated extent of occurrence (EOO) - km2:200
Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO):NoExtreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO):No
Number of Locations:5Continuing decline in number of locations:No
Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations:NoLower elevation limit (metres):900
Upper elevation limit (metres):1200
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:A population study of this species was made in two localities and other which were rigorously surveyed for three years (Watve in litt.). The population size was  estimated to be 1,500 mature individuals with the largest subpopulation containing 500 individuals. A decline in mature individuals was not observed from 2004-2006 although habitat modifications were recorded in some of the localities. Population trend for the global population is not clear.
Current Population Trend:Unknown
Additional data:
Number of mature individuals:1500Continuing decline of mature individuals:No
Extreme fluctuations:NoPopulation severely fragmented:No
Continuing decline in subpopulations:No
Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations:NoAll individuals in one subpopulation:No

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:Primary habitat of this species is monsoonal rock pools of about 20 cm depth formed on ferricretes at altitudes above 800 m in the northern Western Ghats. It secondary habitat may be in water filled ditches formed by soil removal where it grows well for about two years.
Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat:Yes
Generation Length (years):1

Use and Trade [top]

Use and Trade: This species is not in trade or use.

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s): The main threats for this species are habitat disturbance due to construction of windmills leading to major changes in surface drainage. Removal of soil and increased garbage also disturbs the species. In one site, increased tourist pressure leads to trampling of primary habitat. This species being a well known attraction to plant lovers and photographers is often targeted by the tourists leading to habitat disturbance.

According to an earlier flora, one locality is threatened by the construction of a dam. This is highly improbable now (A. Watve pers. obs 2010). The site is remote, at the top of the mountain, highly protected as it is core zone of a newly created Wildlife Sanctuary (Chandoli) and perhaps is the best protected location for this species.

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions: Ex-situ conservation efforts have been done by individuals and institutions including Botanical Survey of India, however none have been successful as the habitat requirements are too specific. More concentrated efforts are needed for a long term for ex-situ conservation. At present conservation of habitats is the best measure (A. Watve pers. obs. 2010) as well as reducing impacts mentioned in the threats section.

Classifications [top]

5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.8. Wetlands (inland) - Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Marshes/Pools (under 8ha)
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
0. Root -> 6. Rocky areas (eg. inland cliffs, mountain peaks)
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Land/water protection -> 1.1. Site/area protection
1. Land/water protection -> 1.2. Resource & habitat protection
3. Species management -> 3.2. Species recovery
3. Species management -> 3.4. Ex-situ conservation -> 3.4.1. Captive breeding/artificial propagation
4. Education & awareness -> 4.2. Training
4. Education & awareness -> 4.3. Awareness & communications
5. Law & policy -> 5.1. Legislation -> 5.1.3. Sub-national level
6. Livelihood, economic & other incentives -> 6.4. Conservation payments

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
  Action Recovery plan:No
  Systematic monitoring scheme:No
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Conservation sites identified:Yes, over part of range
  Occur in at least one PA:Yes
  Area based regional management plan:No
  Invasive species control or prevention:No
In-Place Species Management
  Harvest management plan:No
  Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly:No
  Subject to ex-situ conservation:No
In-Place Education
  Subject to recent education and awareness programmes:No
  Included in international legislation:No
  Subject to any international management/trade controls:No
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.3. Tourism & recreation areas
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

6. Human intrusions & disturbance -> 6.1. Recreational activities
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

7. Natural system modifications -> 7.1. Fire & fire suppression -> 7.1.1. Increase in fire frequency/intensity
♦ timing:Past, Likely to Return ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Causing/Could cause fluctuations ⇒ Impact score:Past Impact 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & diseases -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien species/diseases -> 8.1.1. Unspecified species
♦ timing:Future ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 4 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

9. Pollution -> 9.4. Garbage & solid waste
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
2. Conservation Planning -> 2.1. Species Action/Recovery Plan
2. Conservation Planning -> 2.2. Area-based Management Plan
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.4. Habitat trends

Bibliography [top]

IUCN. 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (ver. 2011.1). Available at: (Accessed: 30 June 2017).

Mishra, D.K. and Singh, N.P. 2001. Endemic and threatened flowering plants of Maharashtra. Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta.

Watve, A. Submitted. Plant community studies on rock outcrops in Northern Western Ghats. Agharkar Research Institute, Pune.

Citation: Watve, A. 2011. Aponogeton satarensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2011: e.T175222A7125282. . Downloaded on 25 September 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