There were 366 species added to the database in the 2008 update. In 2004 there were 5,743 species listed, in 2006 this increased to 5,918, and in 2008 there are now 6,260 species listed. Not all of these additional species were new species descriptions; a few were subspecies recently elevated to species status, or species removed from synonymy. See Table 1 for a summary of these additions.
| Origin of additional species | Number of species |
| New species descriptions (2005, 2006 and 2007) | 294 |
| New species descriptions (earlier than 2005 that had previously been missed) | 8 |
| Elevated from subspecies status or removed from synonymy | 64 |
Not surprisingly, most of these additional species are considered Data Deficient, as there is not enough information currently known to make an assessment of their conservation status. A summary of the IUCN Red List categories assigned to the 366 additional species is given in Table 2 and Figure 1.
| Legend Key | Red List Category | Number of species | Percentage in category |
| Extinct (EX) | 2 | 0.6 | |
| Extinct in the Wild (EW) | 0 | 0.0 | |
| Critically Endangered (CR) | 21 | 5.7 | |
| Endangered (EN) | 21 | 5.7 | |
| Vulnerable (VU) | 42 | 11.5 | |
| Near Threatened (NT) | 12 | 3.3 | |
| Least Concern (LC) | 77 | 21.0 | |
| Data Deficient (DD) | 191 | 52.2 | |
| TOTAL | 366 |

Although we have tried our best to include all newly described species in the 2008 update, it is always difficult to keep up to date with the latest taxonomy. Already we are aware of a number of newly described species that still need to be added, and these species will be a priority for inclusion in the next update of the data. To help us keep up-to-date it is a great help if new species descriptions are sent to us for inclusion. The address to send all new species information, as well as any other information for inclusion in the assessment, is redlist@iucn.org.
wenty-four species were removed in the 2008 update. These are listed below.
Bordoloi, S., Bortamuli, T. and Ohler, A. 2007 Systematics of the genus Rhacophorus (Amphibia, Anura): identity of red-webbed forms and description of a new species from Assam. Zootaxa: 1653:1-20.
Guayasamin, J.M., Cisneros-Heredia, D.F., Castroviejo-Fisher, S. 2008 Taxonomic identity of Cochranella petersi Goin, 1961 and Centrolenella ametarsia: Flores, 1987. Zootaxa: 1815:25-34.
Hedges, S.B., and Heinicke, M.P. 2007 Molecular phylogeny and biogeography of West Indian frogs of the genus Leptodactylus: (Anura, Leptodactylidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution: 44:308-314.
Lehr, E. 2006 Taxonomic status of some species of Peruvian Phrynopus: (Anura: Leptodactylidae), with the description of a new species of the Andes of southern Peru. Herpetologic:a 62:331-347.
Ohler, A. 2007 New synonyms in specific names of frogs (Raninae) from the border regions between China, Laos and Vietnam. Alyte:s 25:55-74.
Verdade, V.K., and Rodrigues, M.T. 2007 Taxonomic review of Allobates: (Anura, Aromobatidae) from the Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Journal of Herpetology: 41:566-580.
Wollenberg, K.C., Veith, M., Noonan, B.P. and Lötters, S. 2006 Polymorphism Versus Species Richness - systematics of Large Dendrobates: from the Eastern Guiana Shield (Amphibia: Dendrobatidae). Copeia: 2006(4):623-629.