Progress of the Pseudophryne corroboree program
at ZAA institutions

Species

Pseudophryne corroboree

Common Name(s)

Corroboree Frog

Region where program is based

Oceania

Country where program is based

Australia

The authority that recommended this species for an ex situ program

NSW Office of Environment and Heritage

Has a genetic analysis been performed on wild populations to define the target taxon, i.e., verify that single, viable Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESU's) that are managed as separate populations, are not confounded by cryptic species or polymorphisms?

Yes

Name of the institution managing the ex situ population

ZAA institutions

Year the program started

2002

Is at least some portion of the captive population maintained in range country?

Yes

Are sufficient resources available to manage the ex situ population?

Yes

Are adequate numbers of skilled staff available with the appropriate ex situ amphibian experience?

Yes

Is sufficient space available for the required population size?

Yes

Additional Support required

Has a Taxon Management Coordinator for the ex situ population been appointed?

Yes

Taxon Management Coordinator

Michael McFadden of Taronga Zoo

Has a Taxon Management Group or Recovery Team been established?

Yes

Has a Taxon Management Plan, Recovery Plan or Species Action Statement been written?

Yes

Have Husbandry Guidelines been written?

Yes

Have any knowledge gaps in the species biology or in their interaction with potential threats been identified that could benefit from research using the ex situ population?

Yes

List of knowledge gaps

Establishing techniques and methods to reintroduce the species.

Have founder needs been calculated using the AArk Amphibian Population Management Guidelines ?

Yes

Have sufficient potential founders been collected? ( AArk Amphibian Population Management Guidelines recommends a minimum of 20 pairs of found animals).

Yes

Is the ex situ population managed by nationals from the range country?

Yes

What tools are used to maximize retention of genetic diversity?

Others

Has the population produced viable offspring?

Yes

Have the first generation captive-bred animals bred successfully?

Yes

Is the ex situ population housed in permanent isolation from other populations occurring outside its range?

Yes

Is work being supported to study and mitigate threats to the species in the wild, either by the institution or by a regional wildlife agency?

Yes

Have captive-bred or captive-reared animals been released into the wild?

Yes

If releases were undertaken, have disease screening protocols or veterinary health checks been conducted prior to releases to the wild?

Yes

Is follow-up work being carried out to monitor progress of the released animals?

Yes

Is the taxon again secure in the wild, even if it might still require some ongoing in situ management? i.e. has the need for a captive assurance population been obviated such that we can call this a successfully terminated captive rescue program?

No

Comments

Participating institutions: Taronga Zoo, Melbourne Zoo, Healesville Sanctuary, Amphibian Research Centre. This species is currently numbering less than 100 in the wild, with numbers still declining, due to chytrid fungus. In 2005, a trial release of 4-5 year old frogs was undertaken from the Amphibian Research Centre. Between 2010-2012, the reintroduction of over 1000 eggs, bred at Taronga Zoo and Zoos Victoria, have taken place into artificial pools within the species natural habitat. Preliminary results are available in the following publication. Hunter, D., G. Marantelli, M. McFadden, P. Harlow, B.Scheele and R. Pietsch. 2010. Assessment of re-introduction methods for the Southern Corroboree Frog in the Snowy Mountains region of Australia, pp 72 _ 76 in Soorae, P. S. (ed.) GLOBAL RE-INTRODUCTION PERSPECTIVES: Additional case-studies from around the globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
1bd318a7 e114 40f0 8372 4715a513ed00 C3ca7e33 338e 4b06 96f3 4ddaad2049bb