Pelophylax lessonae 

Scope: Global
Status_ne_offStatus_dd_offStatus_lc_onStatus_nt_offStatus_vu_offStatus_en_offStatus_cr_offStatus_ew_offStatus_ex_off

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Amphibia Anura Ranidae

Scientific Name: Pelophylax lessonae
Species Authority: (Camerano, 1882)
Common Name(s):
English Pool Frog
Synonym(s):
Rana lessonae Camerano, 1882

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Least Concern ver 3.1
Year Published: 2016
Date Assessed: 2008-12-14
Assessor(s): Kuzmin, S., Beebee, T., Andreone, F., Nyström, P., Anthony, B.P., Schmidt, B., Ogrodowczyk, A., Ogielska, M., Cogalniceanu, D., Kovács, T., Kiss, I., Puky, M. & Vörös, J.
Reviewer(s): Cox, N.A. & Temple, H.J.
Justification:
Listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, tolerance of a broad range of habitats, presumed large population, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a more threatened category.
Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:This species is distributed over much of Europe, ranging as far east as the southern Ural Mountains of Russia. It is absent from the Iberian Peninsula (except for introductions to Spain in Cáceres [Villasbuenas de Gata] and unspecified localities in Galicia, Cataluña and Comunidad Valenciana), much of Scandinavia, central and southern Italy (exact distribution not known but thought to be replaced by P. bergeri) and it is absent from the Balkans. There are two isolated relict populations - one near Oslo (Norway) and Uppland (Sweden) north of Stockholm. It is native (formerly extirpated) to the British Isles and has been recently reintroduced from Sweden. It might occur up to 1,550 m asl in southern parts of its range.
Countries occurrence:
Native:
Austria; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Croatia; Czech Republic; Estonia; France; Germany; Hungary; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Moldova; Montenegro; Netherlands; Norway; Poland; Romania; Russian Federation; Serbia (Serbia); Slovakia; Slovenia; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine
Reintroduced:
United Kingdom
Introduced:
Spain
Additional data:
Upper elevation limit (metres):1550
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:Although this species is reported to be declining over much of its European range (Gasc et al. 1997), it remains widespread and common in Poland, the Baltic Republics, Moldova, Russia and the Ukraine.
Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Population severely fragmented:No

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:It is present in deciduous and mixed forests, forest steppe, steppe, bush lands (e.g. riparian alder groves), meadows, fields and fens. It may often be found in shallow stagnant waterbodies (usually without fish) such as lakes, ponds, swamps, large puddles, clay and gravel pits, and ditches, often covered with dense herbaceous vegetation. It breeds in these wetlands, but may be found hibernating away from waterbodies. It is not very adaptable, but can occur in slightly modified habitats.
Systems:Terrestrial; Freshwater

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s): It is threatened by habitat loss through agricultural intensification and urbanization, channelization of waterbodies, drainage and pollution of wetlands, and the introduction of predatory fishes to breeding sites. It is additionally threatened by afforestation (in northern parts of the range) and competition with the larger sympatric R. ridibunda. The frog-leg trade (which is increasing) and high levels of pollution are leading to significant declines in populations within Yugoslavia (Dzukic 1996, Ljubisavljevic et al. 2003).

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions: It is listed on Appendix III of the Bern Convention and on Annex IV of the EU Natural Habitats Directive. It is protected by national legislation in many countries and is recorded on a number of national and sub-national Red Data books and lists. It is present in many protected areas. In parts of the species' range, mitigation measures to reduce road kill have been established.

Classifications [top]

1. Forest -> 1.4. Forest - Temperate
suitability:Suitable  
3. Shrubland -> 3.4. Shrubland - Temperate
suitability:Suitable  
4. Grassland -> 4.4. Grassland - Temperate
suitability:Suitable  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.1. Wetlands (inland) - Permanent Rivers/Streams/Creeks (includes waterfalls)
suitability:Marginal  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.2. Wetlands (inland) - Seasonal/Intermittent/Irregular Rivers/Streams/Creeks
suitability:Marginal  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.4. Wetlands (inland) - Bogs, Marshes, Swamps, Fens, Peatlands
suitability:Suitable  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.5. Wetlands (inland) - Permanent Freshwater Lakes (over 8ha)
suitability:Suitable  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.6. Wetlands (inland) - Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Lakes (over 8ha)
suitability:Suitable  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.7. Wetlands (inland) - Permanent Freshwater Marshes/Pools (under 8ha)
suitability:Suitable  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.8. Wetlands (inland) - Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Marshes/Pools (under 8ha)
suitability:Suitable  
5. Wetlands (inland) -> 5.13. Wetlands (inland) - Permanent Inland Deltas
suitability:Suitable  
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.1. Artificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land
suitability:Suitable  
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.2. Artificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland
suitability:Suitable  
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.3. Artificial/Terrestrial - Plantations
suitability:Suitable  
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.4. Artificial/Terrestrial - Rural Gardens
suitability:Marginal  
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.5. Artificial/Terrestrial - Urban Areas
suitability:Suitable  
15. Artificial/Aquatic & Marine -> 15.1. Artificial/Aquatic - Water Storage Areas (over 8ha)
suitability:Suitable  
15. Artificial/Aquatic & Marine -> 15.2. Artificial/Aquatic - Ponds (below 8ha)
suitability:Suitable  
15. Artificial/Aquatic & Marine -> 15.3. Artificial/Aquatic - Aquaculture Ponds
suitability:Suitable  
15. Artificial/Aquatic & Marine -> 15.5. Artificial/Aquatic - Excavations (open)
suitability:Marginal  
15. Artificial/Aquatic & Marine -> 15.6. Artificial/Aquatic - Wastewater Treatment Areas
suitability:Marginal  
15. Artificial/Aquatic & Marine -> 15.8. Artificial/Aquatic - Seasonally Flooded Agricultural Land
suitability:Marginal  
0. Root -> 16. Introduced vegetation
suitability:Marginal  
2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management
2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Conservation sites identified:Yes, over entire range
  Occur in at least one PA:Yes
In-Place Species Management
In-Place Education
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.1. Housing & urban areas
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ 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

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming & ranching -> 2.3.3. Agro-industry grazing, ranching or farming
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

8. Invasive & other problematic species & genes -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien species -> 8.1.1. Unspecified species
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

8. Invasive & other problematic species & genes -> 8.2. Problematic native species
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects -> 2.3.2. Competition

9. Pollution -> 9.1. Domestic & urban waste water -> 9.1.3. Type Unknown/Unrecorded
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

9. Pollution -> 9.2. Industrial & military effluents -> 9.2.3. Type Unknown/Unrecorded
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

9. Pollution -> 9.3. Agricultural & forestry effluents -> 9.3.4. Type Unknown/Unrecorded
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

1. Research -> 1.1. Taxonomy
1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
1. Research -> 1.5. Threats
1. Research -> 1.6. Actions
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends

Bibliography [top]

1995. Amphibian Populations in the Commonwealth of Independent States: Current Status and Declines. Pensoft, Moscow.

1997. Atlas of Amphibians and Reptiles in Europe. Societas Europea Herpetologica & Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris.

Arnold, E.N. 2003. Reptiles and amphibians of Europe. Princeton University Press.

Arnold, H.R. 1995. Atlas of amphibians and reptiles in Britain. ITE research publication: 40.

Bannikov, A.G., Darevsky, I.S., Ishchenko, V.G., Rustamov, A.K. and Szczerbak, N.N. 1977. Opredelitel Zemnovodnykh i Presmykayushchikhsya Fauny SSSR [Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of the USSR Fauna]. Prosvechshenie, Moscow.

Burny, J. and Parent, G.H. 1985. Les grenouilles vertes de le Belgique et des régions limitrophes. Données chorologiques et écologiques. Alytes: 12-33.

Dely, G. 1967. Kétéltűek-Amphibia: Magyarország Állatvilága, Faunae Hungariae. Ákadémiai Kiadó, Budapest.

Dzukic, G., Kalezic, M., Aleksic, I. and Crnobrnja, J. 1996. Green frogs exploited in the former Yugoslavia. FrogLog: 3­4.

Garanin, V.I. 2000. The distribution of amphibians in the Volga-Kama region. Advances in Amphibian Research in the former Soviet Union, pp. 79-132.

Gent, T. 1999. The UK Pool Frog species action plan. FrogLog.

IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 30 June 2016).

Kalezic, M. and Dzukic, G. 2001. Amphibian status in Serbia and Montenegro (FR Yugoslavia). FrogLog.

Kovács, T. 2002. Monitoring of amphibians and reptiles along the Drava River. FrogLog.

Krizmanic, I.I. 2008. Water frogs (Rana esculenta complex) in Serbia - morphological data. Archiv Biological Sciences, Belgrade 60: 449-457.

Kuzmin, S.L. 1995. Die Amphibien Russlands und Angrenzender Gebiete. Westarp – Spektrum, Magdeburg - Heidelberg.

Kuzmin, S.L. 1996. Threatened amphibians in the former Soviet Union: the current situation and the main threats. Oryx: 24-30.

Kuzmin, S.L. 1999. The Amphibians of the Former Soviet Union. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow.

Ljubisavljevic, K., Dzukic, G. and Kalezic, M. 2003. Green frogs are greatly endangered in Serbia and Montenegro. FrogLog.

Milinski, M. 1994. Hybridogenetic Frogs on an Evolutionary Dead End Road. Trends in Ecology and Evolution: 62.

Mlynarski, M. 1966. Plazy I Gady Polski. Panstwowe Zaklady Wydawnictw Szkolnych, Warszawa.

Plötner, J. 2005. Die Westpaläarkischen Wasserfrösche von Märtyrern der Wissenschaft zur Biologischen Sensation. Laurenti-Verlag, Bielefeld.

Puky, M. 2000. A kétéltûek védelme Magyarországon (Conservation of amphibians in Hungary). In: Faragó, S. (ed.), Gerinces állatfajok védelme (Conservation of vertebrate species), pp. 143-158. Nyugat-Magyarországi Egyetem Erdõmérnöki Kar, Sopron.

Puky, M. 2003. Amphibian mitigation measures in Central-Europe. In: Irwin, L.C., Garrett, P. and McDermott, K.P. (eds), Proceedings of the International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, 26-31 August, 2003, Lake Placid, New York, USA, pp. 413-429. Center for Transportation and the Environment, North Carolina State University, USA.

Puky, M. 2003. Az újraárasztott Nyirkai Hany - Keleti Mórrétek (Hanság) herpetofaunája (Occurrence of amphibians and reptiles in the Nyirkai Hany Keleti Mórrétek wetland restoration area, Hanság, Hungary in the first year following inundation). Folia Historico Naturalia Musei Matraensis: 341-347.

Puky, M. et al. 2003. Preliminary herpetological atlas of Hungary. Varangy Akciócsoport Egyesület, Budapest.

Sindaco, R., Doria, G., Razzetti, E. and Bernini, F. 2006. Atlas of Italian Amphibians and Reptiles\\Atlante Degli Anfibi E Dei Rettili D'Italia. Societas Herpetologica Italica - Edizioni Polistampa, Firenze.

Sjögren, P. 1994. Distribution and extinction patterns within a northern metapopulation of the pool frog, Rana lessonae. Ecology: 1357-1367.

Smit, G. 1998. DAPTF-Netherlands Report. FrogLog.

Som, C., Anholt, B.R. and Reyer, H.-U. 2000. The effect of assortative mating on the coexistence of a hybridogenetic waterfrog and its sexual host. American Naturalist: 34-46.

Vogrin, N. 1997. The status of amphibians in Slovenia. FrogLog.

Vorburger, C. and Reyer, H.-U. 2003. A genetic mechanism of species replacement in European waterfrogs? Conservation Genetics: 141-155.

Wycherley, J., Doran, S. and Beebee, T.J.C. 2002. Frog calls echo microsatellite phylogeography in the European pool frog Rana lessonae. Journal of Zoology: 479-484.

Zeisset, I. and Beebee, T.J.C. 2001. Determination of biogeographical range: an application of molecular phylogeograpphy to the European pool frog Rana lessonae. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B: 933-938.


Citation: Kuzmin, S., Beebee, T., Andreone, F., Nyström, P., Anthony, B.P., Schmidt, B., Ogrodowczyk, A., Ogielska, M., Cogalniceanu, D., Kovács, T., Kiss, I., Puky, M. & Vörös, J. 2016. Pelophylax lessonae. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T58643A86643256. . Downloaded on 30 July 2016.
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