Research Article |
Corresponding author: Krystal A. Tolley ( k.tolley@sanbi.org.za ) Academic editor: Johannes Penner
© 2023 Krystal A. Tolley, Nicolas S. Telford, Buyisile G. Makhubo, R. John Power, Graham J. Alexander.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Tolley KA, Telford NS, Makhubo BG, Power RJ, Alexander GJ (2023) Filling the gap: Noteworthy herpetological discoveries in North West Province, South Africa. Zoosystematics and Evolution 99(1): 101-116. https://doi.org/10.3897/zse.99.90181
|
The North West Province, South Africa, is centrally situated in southern Africa and is characterised by savannah with a mesic, temperate climate in the east and a hot, arid climate in the west. While the eastern region is fairly well-documented for herpetofauna, the arid central and western regions are poorly surveyed. Given that the Province has been targeted by the national government for development of infrastructure, the overall deficiency of biodiversity data could result in impact assessments that are not well-informed. We, therefore, carried out herpetofaunal surveys over two years (2019–2020) in the North West Province to improve knowledge on the distributions of reptiles and amphibians. Our surveys added a total of 578 new records to an earlier baseline of 1340 records. In addition, over 300 records were added to a citizen-science platform in connection with our surveys. As compared to the previous 100 years, our surveys increased the herpetofaunal dataset by 68% in just two years, increased geographic coverage by 20% and brought the total number of species with accurate records for the Province to 102 reptiles and 23 amphibians. We also recorded range extensions for five reptile species and confirmed the presence of Dendroaspis polylepis (Black Mamba) in the west where it had been last recorded in 1996. Our surveys resulted in a significant increase in biodiversity data for the Province and provided a better foundation for spatial planning that accounts for biodiversity and the maintenance of ecological function.
Africa, amphibians, barcoding, biogeography, conservation, reptiles, spatial planning, species richness, surveys
South Africa has a rich and diverse herpetofauna comprising approximately 33% of the reptile species and 11% of the amphibian species known from sub-Saharan Africa. These species assemblages include 401 native, extant (non-marine) reptile species of which 52% are endemic or near-endemic to the country (> 90% of their range in South Africa;
Despite the relatively comprehensive herpetofaunal knowledge, there are several geographic areas in South Africa that stand out for their paucity of herpetological records (see
a. Location of North West Province, South Africa; b. Ecoregions (orange: western arid Kalahari, yellow: southern Highveld grassland, green: eastern mesic Bushveld, superimposed by the degree of habitat transformation as of 2019 (grey); c. Average temperature of warmest quarter (°C; bio10); d. Annual precipitation (mm/year; bio12). Environmental data from CHELSA (http://chelsa-climate.org/) and land cover data from South African Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (https://egis.environment.gov.za/sa_national_land_cover_datasets). Polygons within South Africa show provincial borders.
The elevated risk to biodiversity is particularly germane given that the North West Province Development Plan – 2030 (
Effective spatial planning and mapping of critical biodiversity areas must be based on underlying biological information, such as data on vegetation type, freshwater features and species occurrence records. While there is some existing knowledge on certain of these biological and environmental traits, the Province is not well surveyed for species occurrence, particularly for reptiles and amphibians (see
Overall, current knowledge suggests that species richness is highest along the eastern margin of the North West Province (
To improve knowledge of herpetofaunal diversity for North West Province, we carried out targeted surveys in the most poorly sampled regions of the Province, identified through interrogation of the historical data available on public databases. Using our new data, together with publicly available data of sufficient quality, we improved the quality of the species richness maps, record range extensions and generated a more comprehensive species list for the Province. We also provide new, publicly accessible data for North West Province which can be used for spatial planning.
A pre-survey herpetofaunal dataset was assembled by gathering occurrence records from databases that were available on commonly accessed public databases prior to our surveys. These data were considered representative of the scope and type of data that would be readily available for spatial planning at that time. Databases accessed were iNaturalist (inaturalist.org, ReptileMap and FrogMap (http://vmus.adu.org.za/) for North West Province as of 31 December 2018. Data from ReptileMap and FrogMap partly consist of records collated and published by past atlassing projects, which included museum records and photographs contributed by citizen scientists (
Species distribution maps were downloaded (as of 31 December 2018) from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (https://www.iucnredlist.org/) and the South African Species Status website (http://speciesstatus.sanbi.org/). These were used to create species richness maps in QGIS v.3.2 (
We created a density map to show the spatial distribution of accurate records available for the Province. Therefore, all records that were only available at a low resolution (i.e. QDS or lower) were not included. Using the filtered and edited dataset, the density of species records was calculated in QGIS v.3.2 through the ‘counts’ analysis tool and done so separately for reptiles and amphibians to generate maps of existing sampling effort (i.e. record density). The density of accurate records was mapped to identify undersampled areas in the Province (Fig.
Density of reptile (left) and amphibian (right) species records for North West Province a. Prior to surveys; b. Total density including surveys; c. Accurate historical occurrence records (circles), new survey records (triangles) and new iNaturalist records (stars). The three main and one extra survey sites are shown by ellipses with broken outlines (smallest ellipse shows the site selected for the 5-day survey) with the trapping localities at the three main sites indicated by the open circles.
Occurrence of reptiles and amphibians were recorded using GPS (~ 3 m precision) and DNA samples and/or voucher specimens were taken for a representative set of individuals. All voucher specimens were fixed in 10% formalin and transferred to 70% ethanol after 48 hours and DNA samples were preserved in NAP buffer. After processing, voucher specimens were deposited in the National Museum, Bloemfontein and DNA samples were deposited in the National Wildlife Biobank (South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria).
Species identifications were made based on scalation and other morphological features using standard field guides for the region (e.g.
New records were collated with the historical dataset to create a final dataset of all records for the Province that met our accuracy and precision criteria. Range extensions were identified as species recorded outside the existing known distributions from the IUCN (www.iucnredlist.org/), with additional guidance taken from maps in
The final dataset was used to create new record density maps at the QDS resolution (for comparative purposes, at the same resolution as
From the initial species richness mapping overlaying the distributions of individual species, we estimated that up to 115 reptile and 34 amphibian species are likely to occur in North West Province (Appendices
Number of records for existing (up to end of 2018) and new datasets (2019 through 2020) for reptiles and amphibians from the North West Province, South Africa. Existing data from the ReptileMap and FrogMap datasets excluded duplicate records and those that lacked adequate precision.
Reptiles | Amphibians | |
---|---|---|
Pre-survey | ||
ReptileMap/FrogMap | 808 | 190 |
iNaturalist | 259 | 52 |
Total pre-survey records | 1067 | 239 |
New records | ||
North West survey | 477 | 101 |
iNaturalist 2019–2020 | 210 | 109 |
Total new records | 687 | 210 |
Total records | 1754 | 449 |
% increase | 64% | 88% |
For the 24 barcoded samples, all returned a high DNA sequence similarity score (i.e. > 96%) matching either sequences on GenBank or matching our additional sequenced material (Table
Tentative field identifications that were confirmed or alternative identifications made through DNA barcoding. Provided in the columns are the field number, taxonomic information, GenBank accession numbers for each gene and the percentage sequence similarity to DNA sequences on GenBank given in parentheses. Dashes indicate genes not sequenced. Additional material sequenced for comparative purposes are also provided. Voucher specimen numbers are given where available (PEM: Port Elizabeth Museum, NMB: National Museum Bloemfontein). The species are ordered alphabetically by taxonomic hierarchy (by Order, Family and Genus/species).
Field # | Order | Family | Field ID | Barcoded ID | 16S | Cyt– b | ND4 | c– mos | Voucher |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S1016 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia delalandii | A. delalandii | OP508237 (100) | – | – | – | – |
M144 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia delalandii | A. delalandii | OP508236 (100) | – | – | – | – |
T099A | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia poyntoni | A. poyntoni | OP508238 (100) | – | – | – | – |
T099B | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia poyntoni | A. poyntoni | OP508239 (100) | – | – | – | – |
T114 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia poyntoni | A. delalandii | OP508240 (99.8) | – | – | – | – |
T115 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia poyntoni | A. delalandii | OP508241 (99.8) | – | – | – | – |
S902 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna cryptotis | T. krugerensis | OP508720 (99.6) | – | – | – | – |
N001 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna sp. | T. tandyi | OP50871 (99.8) | – | – | – | NMB A08209 |
T024 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna sp. | T. tandyi | OP508718 (99.8) | – | – | – | NMB A08257 |
T123 | Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna sp. | T. tandyi | OP508719 (99.8) | – | – | – | NMB A08255 |
T089 | Squamata | Agamidae | Agama sp. | A. atra | OP508303 (99.4) | – | – | – | NMB R11946 |
T090 | Squamata | Agamidae | Agama sp. | A. atra | OP508304 (99.4) | – | – | – | NMB R11947 |
M038 | Squamata | Elapidae | Naja nivea (skin) | N. nivea | OP508307 (100) | – | – | – | – |
S891 | Squamata | Gekkonidae | Chondrodactylus bibronii | C. bibronii | OP508305 (96.2) | – | – | – | – |
S941 | Squamata | Gekkonidae | Hemidactylus mabouia | H. mabouia | OP508306 (96.6) | – | – | – | NMB R11828 |
KAT20-1 | Squamata | Psammophiidae | Psammophis brevirostris | P. brevirostris | – | OP535022 (99.9) | OP535026 (99.9) | OP535017 (100) | – |
N020 | Squamata | Psammophiidae | Psammophis brevirostris | P. brevirostris | – | OP535023 (99.9) | OP535027 (99.9) | OP535018 (100) | NMB R11904 |
N061 | Squamata | Psammophiidae | Psammophis brevirostris | P. brevirostris | – | – | OP535028 (99.7) | OP535019 (100) | NMB R11954 |
M041 | Squamata | Scincidae | Trachylepis spilogaster | T. punctatissima | OP508516 (99.4) | – | – | – | NMB R11844 |
M047 | Squamata | Scincidae | Trachylepis spilogaster | T. punctatissima | OP508517 (99.4) | – | – | – | – |
S839 | Squamata | Scincidae | Trachylepis spilogaster | T. punctatissima | OP508518 (99.6) | – | – | – | NMB R11807 |
S876 | Squamata | Scincidae | Trachylepis spilogaster | T. punctatissima | OP508519 (99.6) | – | – | – | NMB R11839 |
S904 | Squamata | Scincidae | Trachylepis spilogaster | T. punctatissima | OP508520 (99.6) | – | – | – | NMB R11820 |
M143 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | P. galeata | OP508410 (100) | – | – | – | – |
Additional material sequenced | |||||||||
GAL10 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508410 | – | – | – | – |
HB048 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508411 | – | – | – | – |
MB 21424 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508412 | – | – | – | – |
MBUR 00553 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508413 | – | – | – | – |
MBUR 01266 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508414 | – | – | – | – |
RSP057 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508415 | – | – | – | – |
S594 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508416 | – | – | – | – |
TGE T3-8 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508417 | – | – | – – | |
WC-5833 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508418 | – | – | – | PEM R23646 |
WP318 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa galeata | na | OP508419 | – | – | – | – |
HB521 | Testudines | Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa subrufa | na | OP508420 | – | – | – | – |
MBUR 00238 | Squamata | Psammophiidae | Psammophis brevirostris | na | – | OP535024 | OP535029 | OP535020 | – |
MBUR 01225 | Squamata | Psammophiidae | Psammophis brevirostris | na | – | OP535025 | OP535030 | OP535021 | – |
Overall, our field surveys added a total of 578 new records (477 reptile and 101 amphibian records) from 74 reptile and 20 amphibian species and these data have been deposited with the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (www.gbif.org) and are publicly available (https://doi.org/10.15468/v9y9p5). An additional 319 new records made by citizen scientists were deposited on iNaturalist, motivated by our interactions with North West Province citizenry (Table
By comparing our records to the known geographic range for each species (i.e.
Currently inferred ranges of reptiles from South Africa where survey data confirm previously uncertain range edges for a. Chondrodactylus bibronii; b. Dendroaspis polylepis; extend previously inferred ranges for c. Pelomedusa galeata; d. Python natalensis; include new records that are outlying to the currently inferred range edge for e. Causus rhombeatus; f. Elapsoidea sundevallii; and represent a new extra-limital record for g. Hemidactylus mabouia. Black squares show the localities (at the quarter degree level) for new records that influence the known range extents, whereas the open squares show previously-existing records.
Our final dataset was used to create updated species richness maps for South African reptiles and amphibians using the same methods described above (Fig.
Our targeted surveys in North West Province resulted in a substantial increase in the size of the provincial herpetofaunal dataset in comparison to accurate records collected over the previous 100 years – we increased the dataset by 68% in only two years. Our records were also of better quality than those in the pre-existing historical dataset, with more precise locality information and many voucher specimens that are linked to tissue samples. Our pre-survey analyses of record density allowed us to strategically target areas most in need of survey effort and to focus survey techniques to maximise the chance of recording species that had not previously been recorded in the surveyed areas. Thus, our records were almost all geographically unique, increasing their value and impact for regional planning and assessment of biodiversity. Our surveys revealed that several species are more widespread in North West Province than historical records indicated, resulting in the extension of several known ranges. Our comparative analysis of species richness also showed that estimates were influenced by sampling intensity, suggesting that further surveys in the Province are needed. These findings highlight the importance of targeted biodiversity sampling in improving baseline occurrence datasets, which form the foundation for development plans and supporting conservation management (see
Surprisingly, several of the range extensions recorded in our surveys were large-bodied species that would not be expected to go undetected in areas of occurrence and is further testament to how poorly the area has been surveyed to date. As with the range extensions for mammals (
Within the North West Province, the zoogeography has been broadly divided into three areas that generally correspond to defined ecological bioregions: the western arid Kalahari, eastern mesic Bushveld and southern Highveld grasslands based on mammals (
Dissimilarity between the species richness patterns for mammals and reptiles demonstrates the limitations of relying on selected taxonomic groups as surrogates for biodiversity planning (
Several specimens collected during our surveys were difficult to identify with meaningful confidence required for biodiversity inventories. This was the result of the presence of several morphologically similar species occurring in the area (e.g. Trachylepis sp.:
The dearth of records for even charismatic or notorious species might be sufficient to foster renewed interest in surveying North West Province. This need not be limited to bona fide scientific institutions and citizen scientists should be incentivised to inventory such areas (i.e. contributing to online platforms or BioBlitz projects;
The significant impact of the data collected during our targeted surveys on the North West Province biodiversity database demonstrates the benefit of conducting targeted surveys for filling geographic gaps in species distribution data. Unfortunately, the recent trend of increasing levels of red tape relating to bureaucratic hurdles associated with the collection of biological data can severely impede progress (
We would like to thank the North West Province Department of Economic Development, Environment, Conservation and Tourism for research permits, logistical assistance, as well as the North West Parks Board for access to protected areas (Molopo, Botsalano and Mafikeng Game Reserves) and numerous private landowners who allowed access to their properties. We are grateful to Jody Barends, Keith Dube, Nkanyiso Dlamini, Falie Forster, Kim Scholtz, Kirstin Stephens and Jody Taft for assistance in the field. Josh Weeber assisted with GIS and mapping, Michael Bates and Cora Stobie assisted with museum accessions and Hannelie Synman and Fhatani Ranwashi undertook the GBIF submission on our behalf. Jean-Jacques Forgus is thanked for the laboratory work for DNA barcoding, Uwe Fritz for advice on Pelomedusa and Werner Conradie for the photo of Hemidactylus mabouia. Collated pre-survey data were provided by iNaturalist and by the Biodiversity and Development Institute – Virtual Museum at the Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology (namely, ReptileMap and FrogMap). The many original contributors to both these platforms (museums, researchers and citizens) are thanked for their records that are part of those databases. This project was funded by the National Research Foundation of South Africa, Foundational Biodiversity Information Program (UID 115944) and was carried out under provincial permits NW7299/02/2019 and NW7898/03/2020.
Reptile species (listed by Order and Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Africa. Those with accurate records are indicated (X) for each time period (pre-survey years – through 2018 and survey years – 2019 & 2020). If indicated by a Q in the pre-survey column, there are records for the species, but only at the resolution of quarter-degree grid square (QDS). Distribution column indicates species (X) with IUCN distribution maps that intersect with the Province, although some have not been recorded from the Province. The species are indicated as endemic, near endemic (> 90% of range in South Africa) or not endemic to South Africa and the IUCN Red List assessment type (Global or Regional), threat category and threat criteria as of 2021 are given for each species. DD: Data Deficient, LC: Least Concern, VU: Vulnerable (no Endangered or Critically Endangered species occur in the North West Province).
Reptile species (listed by Order and Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Africa.
Order | Family | Genus | Species | Pre-survey | Survey | Distribution | South African Occurrence | Assessment Type | Threat Category | Threat Criteria |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Crocodylia | ||||||||||
Crocodylidae | Crocodylus | niloticus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | VU | A2ac | |
Squamata-Lizard | ||||||||||
Agamidae | Acanthocercus | atricollis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Agamidae | Agama | aculeata | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Agamidae | Agama | atra | X | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Amphisbaenidae | Dalophia | pistillum | Q | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Amphisbaenidae | Monopeltis | capensis | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Amphisbaenidae | Monopeltis | infuscata | Q | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Amphisbaenidae | Monopeltis | leonhardi | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||||
Amphisbaenidae | Monopeltis | mauricei | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Amphisbaenidae | Zygaspis | quadrifrons | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Chamaeleonidae | Chamaeleo | dilepis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Cordylidae | Chamaesaura | aenea | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||||
Cordylidae | Cordylus | jonesii | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Cordylidae | Cordylus | vittifer | X | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Cordylidae | Karusasaurus | polyzonus | Q | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Cordylidae | Pseudocordylus | melanotus | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||||
Gekkonidae | Chondrodactylus | bibronii | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Gekkonidae | Chondrodactylus | turneri | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Gekkonidae | Hemidactylus | mabouia | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Gekkonidae | Homopholis | arnoldi | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Gekkonidae | Lygodactylus | bradfieldi | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Squamata-Lizard | Gekkonidae | Lygodactylus | capensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |
Gekkonidae | Lygodactylus | ocellatus | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Gekkonidae | Pachydactylus | affinis | X | X | X | Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Gekkonidae | Pachydactylus | capensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Gekkonidae | Pachydactylus | wahlbergii | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Gekkonidae | Ptenopus | garrulus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Gerrhosauridae | Gerrhosaurus | flavigularis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Lacertidae | Heliobolus | lugubris | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Lacertidae | Ichnotropis | capensis | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Lacertidae | Meroles | squamulosus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Lacertidae | Nucras | holubi | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Lacertidae | Nucras | intertexta | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Lacertidae | Nucras | lalandii | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Lacertidae | Nucras | ornata | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Lacertidae | Pedioplanis | lineoocellata | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Lacertidae | Pedioplanis | namaquensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Acontias | gracilicauda | X | X | X | Near endemic | Global | LC | ||
Scincidae | Acontias | kgalagadi | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Scincidae | Acontias | occidentalis | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Scincidae | Mochlus | sundevallii | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Panaspis | wahlbergii | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | capensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | damarana | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | laevigata | X | X | Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | occidentalis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | punctatissima | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | punctulata | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | spilogaster | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | sulcata | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | varia | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Scincidae | Trachylepis | variegata | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Varanidae | Varanus | albigularis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Varanidae | Varanus | niloticus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Squamata-Snake | ||||||||||
Atractaspididae | Amblyodipsas | polylepis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Atractaspididae | Amblyodipsas | ventrimaculata | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||||
Atractaspididae | Aparallactus | capensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Atractaspididae | Atractaspis | bibronii | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Atractaspididae | Atractaspis | duerdeni | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Atractaspididae | Homoroselaps | lacteus | Q | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Atractaspididae | Xenocalamus | bicolor | Q | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Colubridae | Crotaphopeltis | hotamboeia | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Colubridae | Dasypeltis | scabra | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Colubridae | Dispholidus | typus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Colubridae | Philothamnus | hoplogaster | Q | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Colubridae | Philothamnus | occidentalis | X | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Colubridae | Philothamnus | semivariegatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Colubridae | Telescopus | semiannulatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Colubridae | Thelotornis | capensis | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Elapidae | Aspidelaps | scutatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Elapidae | Dendroaspis | polylepis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Elapidae | Elapsoidea | boulengeri | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Elapidae | Elapsoidea | sundevallii | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Elapidae | Hemachatus | haemachatus | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Elapidae | Naja | annulifera | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Elapidae | Naja | mossambica | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Elapidae | Naja | nivea | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Lamprophiidae | Boaedon | capensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Lamprophiidae | Gracililima | nyassae | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Lamprophiidae | Lamprophis | aurora | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Lamprophiidae | Limaformosa | capensis | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Lamprophiidae | Lycodonomorphus | inornatus | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||||
Lamprophiidae | Lycodonomorphus | laevissimus | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Lamprophiidae | Lycodonomorphus | rufulus | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Lamprophiidae | Lycophidion | capense | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Prosymnidae | Prosymna | bivittata | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Prosymnidae | Prosymna | sundevallii | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Leptotyphlopidae | Leptotyphlops | distanti | Q | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Squamata-Snake | Leptotyphlopidae | Leptotyphlops | incognitus | Q | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Leptotyphlopidae | Leptotyphlops | scutifrons | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Psammophiidae | Dipsina | multimaculata | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||||
Psammophiidae | Psammophis | angolensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Psammophiidae | Psammophis | brevirostris | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Psammophiidae | Psammophis | crucifer | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||||
Psammophiidae | Psammophis | leightoni | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Psammophiidae | Psammophis | subtaeniatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Psammophiidae | Psammophylax | rhombeatus | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Psammophiidae | Psammophylax | tritaeniatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Pseudaspididae | Pseudaspis | cana | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Pseudoxyrhophiidae | Duberria | lutrix | Q | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Pythonidae | Python | natalensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Typhlopidae | Afrotyphlops | bibronii | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Typhlopidae | Rhinotyphlops | lalandei | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Viperidae | Bitis | arietans | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Viperidae | Bitis | caudalis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Viperidae | Causus | defilippii | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||||
Viperidae | Causus | rhombeatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Testudines | ||||||||||
Pelomedusidae | Pelomedusa | galeata | X | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Pelomedusidae | Pelusios | sinuatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Testudinidae | Homopus | femoralis | X | X | Endemic | Global | LC | |||
Testudinidae | Kinixys | lobatsiana | X | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | VU | A4cde | |
Testudinidae | Kinixys | spekii | Q | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | |||
Testudinidae | Psammobates | oculifer | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC | ||
Testudinidae | Stigmochelys | pardalis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Regional | LC |
Amphibian species (listed by Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Africa. Those with accurate records are indicated (X) for each time period (pre-survey years – through 2018 and survey years – 2019 & 2020). If indicated by a Q in the pre-survey column, there are records for that species, but only at the less precise quarter-degree level and these records were not included in the mapping datasets. Mapping column indicates species (X) which are presumed to occur in the Province given their overall distribution, but have not yet been recorded. The species are indicated as endemic, near endemic (> 90% of range in South Africa) or not endemic to South Africa and the IUCN Red List assessment type (Global or Regional), threat category as of 2021 are given for each species. LC: Least Concern, NE: Not Evaluated (No Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened amphibians occur in the North West Province).
Amphibian species (listed by Family) recorded from or presumed to occur in the North West Province, South Africa.
Order | Family | Genus | Species | Pre-survey | Survey | Distribution | South African Occurrence | Assessment Type | Threat Category |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anura | Bufonidae | Poyntonophrynus | fenoulheti | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Bufonidae | Poyntonophrynus | vertebralis | Q | X | Endemic | Global | LC | |
Anura | Bufonidae | Schismaderma | carens | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Bufonidae | Sclerophrys | capensis | X | X | X | Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Bufonidae | Sclerophrys | garmani | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Bufonidae | Sclerophrys | gutturalis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Bufonidae | Sclerophrys | poweri | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Bufonidae | Sclerophrys | pusilla | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Anura | Bufonidae | Vandijkophrynus | gariepensis | Q | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | |
Anura | Hemisotidae | Hemisus | marmoratus | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Anura | Hyperoliidae | Hyperolius | marmoratus | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Anura | Hyperoliidae | Kassina | senegalensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Hyperoliidae | Semnodactylus | wealii | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Anura | Brevicpetidae | Breviceps | adspersus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Microhylidae | Phrynomantis | bifasciatus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Phrynobatrachidae | Phrynobatrachus | natalensis | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | |
Anura | Pipidae | Xenopus | laevis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Ptychadenidae | Hildebrandtia | ornata | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Anura | Ptychadenidae | Ptychadena | porosissima | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia | delalandii | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia | fuscigula | Q | X | Endemic | Global | LC | |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Amietia | poyntoni | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Pyxicephalus | edulis | Q | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Strongylopus | grayii | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC | ||
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna | adiastola | X | Not Endemic | Not Evaluated | NE | ||
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna | krugerensis | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna | tandyi | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Cacosternum | boettgeri | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Ptychadenidae | Ptychadena | anchietae | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Ptychadenidae | Ptychadena | mossambica | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Pyxicephalus | adspersus | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Strongylopus | fasciatus | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC | |
Anura | Pyxicephalidae | Tomopterna | natalensis | X | X | X | Near Endemic | Global | LC |
Anura | Rhacophoridae | Chiromantis | xerampelina | X | X | X | Not Endemic | Global | LC |