Journal of Research in Biology Volume 4 Issue 3

Aim and Scope
Journal of Research in Biology is an international scientific journal committed to the development and spread of
research in Biological sciences. It accepts research articles with affiliation to biological science from all around the globe and
publishes them in the journal. The submitted articles are peer-reviewed by experts in the field and editorial board members. Make
the most of your research by publishing articles in Journal of Research in Biology.
Journal of Research in Biology works as a portal for biological scientific research publication. It works to promote the use
of biological sciences knowledge in the world public policy, and to develop and advance science policy that serves the needs of
scientific research and education communities, particularly the biological sciences.
The journal has been uniquely positioned to help members of the scientific community; become effective advocates
for their science and to be better known for the public that relate to or impact the biological sciences.
Call for Papers

Journal of Research in Biology seeks Research Articles, Short Communications and Mini reviews. The Journal will accept
and review submissions in English from any author, in any global locality. A body of international peers will review all
submissions with potential author revisions as recommended by reviewers, with the intent to achieve published papers that:
Relate to the field of Biology
Represent new, previously unpublished work
Advance the state of knowledge of the field
Conform to a high standard of presentation.

Disclaimer:

Journal of Research in Biology is not responsible for the content of individual manuscripts. Manuscripts available in this journal were peer reviewed. Manuscripts
accepted in the issues conform to the editorial policies. But more details regarding the nature of their research, conflicts in their workplace, plagiarisms, stealing of others
property, manipulation of data, illegal formulation of a paper from other allied papers etc., were all not known to us. Any details, queries regarding the manuscripts should
be only dealt with the authors and not with the publisher. The concept of peer review can only limit the plagiarism to a small extent where as it is the work of the public
and the individuals to identify and stop the illegal formulation of new articles from the other. The publisher invites all details regarding the plagiarism of an article
published in the journal provided with the original data and supplementary files for confirmation. On identifying plagiarism issues in an article, the article published will be
removed from the journal website and further on the citation of the same will be debarred. Provided the author of the manuscript will be prohibited to publish his/her
other studies in our journal or throughout the journals under our portal.
List of Editors of Editors in the Journal of Research in Biology

Managing and Executive Editor:
Abiya Chelliah [Molecular Biology]
Publisher, Journal of Research in Biology.

Editorial Board Members:
Ciccarese [Molecular Biology]
Universita di Bari, Italy.

Sathishkumar [Plant Biotechnologist]
Bharathiar University.

SUGANTHY [Entomologist]
TNAU, Coimbatore.

Elanchezhyan [Agriculture, Entomology]
TNAU, Tirunelveli.

Syed Mohsen Hosseini [Forestry & Ecology]
Tarbiat Modares University (TMU), Iran.

Dr. Ramesh. C. K [Plant Tissue Culture]
Sahyadri Science College, Karnataka.

Kamal Prasad Acharya [Conservation Biology]
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Norway.

Dr. Ajay Singh [Zoology]
Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur

Dr. T. P. Mall [Ethnobotany and Plant pathoilogy]
Kisan PG College, BAHRAICH

Ramesh Chandra [Hydrobiology, Zoology]
S.S.(P.G.)College, Shahjahanpur, India.

Adarsh Pandey [Mycology and Plant Pathology]
SS P.G.College, Shahjahanpur, India

Hanan El-Sayed Mohamed Abd El-All Osman [Plant Ecology]
Al-Azhar university, Egypt

Ganga suresh [Microbiology]
Sri Ram Nallamani Yadava College of Arts & Sciences, Tenkasi, India.

T.P. Mall [Ethnobotany, Plant pathology]
Kisan PG College,BAHRAICH, India.

Mirza Hasanuzzaman [Agronomy, Weeds, Plant]
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Bangladesh

Mukesh Kumar Chaubey [Immunology, Zoology]
Mahatma Gandhi Post Graduate College, Gorakhpur, India.

N.K. Patel [Plant physiology & Ethno Botany]
Sheth M.N.Science College, Patan, India.

Kumudben Babulal Patel [Bird, Ecology]
Gujarat, India.

CHANDRAMOHAN [Biochemist]
College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University.

B.C. Behera [Natural product and their Bioprospecting]
Agharkar Research Institute, Pune, INDIA.

Kuvalekar Aniket Arun [Biotechnology]
Lecturer, Pune.

Mohd. Kamil Usmani [Entomology, Insect taxonomy]
Aligarh Muslim university, Aligarh, india.

Dr. Lachhman Das Singla [Veterinary Parasitology]
Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana, India.

Vaclav Vetvicka [Immunomodulators and Breast Cancer]
University of Louisville, Kentucky.

Jos F. Gonzlez-Maya [Conservation Biology]
Laboratorio de ecologa y conservacin de fauna Silvestre,
Instituto de Ecologa, UNAM, Mxico.

Dr. Afreenish Hassan [Microbiology]
Department of Pathology, Army Medical College, Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

Gurjit Singh [Soil Science]
Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Amritsar, Punjab, India.

Dr. Marcela Pagano [Mycology]
Universidade Federal de So Joo del-Rei, Brazil.

Dr.Amit Baran Sharangi [Horticulture]
BCKV (Agri University), West Bengal, INDIA.

Dr. Bhargava [Melittopalynology]
School of Chemical & Biotechnology, Sastra University, Tamilnadu, INDIA.

Dr. Sri Lakshmi Sunitha Merla [Plant Biotechnology]
Jawaharlal Technological University, Hyderabad.

Dr. Mrs. Kaiser Jamil [Biotechnology]
Bhagwan Mahavir Medical Research Centre, Hyderabad, India.

Ahmed Mohammed El Naim [Agronomy]
University of Kordofan, Elobeid-SUDAN.

Dr. Zohair Rahemo [Parasitology]
University of Mosul, Mosul,Iraq.

Dr. Birendra Kumar [Breeding and Genetic improvement]
Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Lucknow, India.

Dr. Sanjay M. Dave [Ornithology and Ecology]
Hem. North Gujarat University, Patan.

Dr. Nand Lal [Micropropagation Technology Development]
C.S.J.M. University, India.

Fbio M. da Costa [Biotechnology: Integrated pest control, genetics]
Federal University of Rondnia, Brazil.

Marcel Avramiuc [Biologist]
Stefan cel Mare University of Suceava, Romania.

Dr. Meera Srivastava [Hematology , Entomology]
Govt. Dungar College, Bikaner.

P. Gurusaravanan [Plant Biology ,Plant Biotechnology and Plant Science]
School of Life Sciences, Bharathidasan University, India.

Dr. Mrs Kavita Sharma [Botany]
Arts and commerce girls college Raipur (C.G.), India.

Suwattana Pruksasri [Enzyme technology, Biochemical Engineering]
Silpakorn University, Thailand.

Dr.Vishwas Balasaheb Sakhare [Reservoir Fisheries]
Yogeshwari Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai, India.

Dr. Pankaj Sah [Environmental Science, Plant Ecology]
Higher College of Technology (HCT), Al-Khuwair.

Dr. Erkan Kalipci [Environmental Engineering]
Selcuk University, Turkey.

Dr Gajendra Pandurang Jagtap [Plant Pathology]
College of Agriculture, India.

Dr. Arun M. Chilke [Biochemistry, Enzymology, Histochemistry]
Shree Shivaji Arts, Commerce & Science College, India.

Dr. AC. Tangavelou [Biodiversity, Plant Taxonomy]
Bio-Science Research Foundation, India.

Nasroallah Moradi Kor [Animal Science]
Razi University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran

T. Badal Singh [plant tissue culture]
Panjab University, India

Dr. Kalyan Chakraborti [Agriculture, Pomology, horticulture]
AICRP on Sub-Tropical Fruits, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya,
Kalyani, Nadia, West Bengal, India.

Dr. Monanjali Bandyopadhyay [Farmlore, Traditional and indigenous
practices, Ethno botany]
V. C., Vidyasagar University, Midnapore.

M.Sugumaran [Phytochemistry]
Adhiparasakthi College of Pharmacy, Melmaruvathur, Kancheepuram District.

Prashanth N S [Public health, Medicine]
Institute of Public Health, Bangalore.

Tariq Aftab
Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India.

Manzoor Ahmad Shah
Department of Botany, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, India.

Syampungani Stephen
School of Natural Resources, Copperbelt University, Kitwe, Zambia.

Iheanyi Omezuruike OKONKO
Department of Biochemistry & Microbiology, Lead City University,
Ibadan, Nigeria.

Sharangouda Patil
Toxicology Laboratory, Bioenergetics & Environmental Sciences Division,
National Institue of Animal Nutrition
and Physiology (NIANP, ICAR), Adugodi, Bangalore.

Jayapal
Nandyal, Kurnool, Andrapradesh, India.

T.S. Pathan [Aquatic toxicology and Fish biology]
Department of Zoology, Kalikadevi Senior College, Shirur, India.

Aparna Sarkar [Physiology and biochemistry]
Amity Institute of Physiotherapy, Amity campus, Noida, INDIA.

Dr. Amit Bandyopadhyay [Sports & Exercise Physiology]
Department of Physiology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, INDIA .

Maruthi [Plant Biotechnology]
Dept of Biotechnology, SDM College (Autonomous),
Ujire Dakshina Kannada, India.

Veeranna [Biotechnology]
Dept of Biotechnology, SDM College (Autonomous),
Ujire Dakshina Kannada, India.

RAVI [Biotechnology & Bioinformatics]
Department of Botany, Government Arts College, Coimbatore, India.

Sadanand Mallappa Yamakanamardi [Zoology]
Department of Zoology, University of Mysore, Mysore, India.

Anoop Das [Ornithologist]
Research Department of Zoology, MES Mampad College, Kerala, India.

Dr. Satish Ambadas Bhalerao [Environmental Botany]
Wilson College, Mumbai

Rafael Gomez Kosky [Plant Biotechnology]
Instituto de Biotecnologa de las Plantas, Universidad Central de Las Villas
Eudriano Costa [Aquatic Bioecology]
IOUSP - Instituto Oceanogrfico da Universidade de So Paulo, Brasil

M. Bubesh Guptha [Wildlife Biologist]
Wildlife Management Circle (WLMC), India

Rajib Roychowdhury [Plant science]
Centre for biotechnology visva-bharati, India.

Dr. S.M.Gopinath [Environmental Biotechnology]
Acharya Institute of Technology, Bangalore.

Dr. U.S. Mahadeva Rao [Bio Chemistry]
Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Malaysia.

Hrida Regina Nunes Salgado [Pharmacist]
Unesp - Universidade Estadual Paulista, Brazil

Mandava Venkata Basaveswara Rao [Chemistry]
Krishna University, India.

Dr. Mostafa Mohamed Rady [Agricultural Sciences]
Fayoum University, Egypt.

Dr. Hazim Jabbar Shah Ali [Poultry Science]
College of Agriculture, University of Baghdad , Iraq.

Danial Kahrizi [Plant Biotechnology, Plant Breeding,Genetics]
Agronomy and Plant Breeding Dept., Razi University, Iran

Dr. Houhun LI [Systematics of Microlepidoptera, Zoogeography, Coevolution,
Forest protection]
College of Life Sciences, Nankai University, China.

Mara de la Concepcin Garca Aguilar [Biology]
Center for Scientific Research and Higher Education of Ensenada, B. C., Mexico

Fernando Reboredo [Archaeobotany, Forestry, Ecophysiology]
New University of Lisbon, Caparica, Portugal

Dr. Pritam Chattopadhyay [Agricultural Biotech, Food Biotech, Plant Biotech]
Visva-Bharati (a Central University), India

Table of Contents (Volume 4 - Issue 3)

Serial No Accession No Title of the article Page No

1 RA0428 A review on the distribution of Western Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolock
hoolock) in Northeast India.
Pallab Deb, Prabhat Kumar Rai and Parimal C. Bhattacharjee.

1301-1310
2 RA0352 Meiosis and Chromosome Complement of Atractomorpha lata (=A.
bedeli) (Mochulsky, 1866) (Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae) Collected in
Cameroon.
Seino Richard Akwanjoh, Dongmo Tonleu Ingrid, Dongmo Alain and
Manjeli Yacouba.
1311-1316

3

RA0432

Diversity, distribution, threats and conservation action of fish fauna in
Chinnar Reservoir, Tamil Nadu.
Manickam Raja, Rajendiran Ramkumar and Pachiappan Perumal.

1317-1327

4

RA0389

New locality record of yellow collared wolf snake Lycodon flavicollis
mukherjee and bhupathy, 2007 from seshachalam biosphere reserve,
Eastern Ghats, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Bubesh Guptha M, Thulasaiah T and Sivaram Prasad NV.

1328-1331

Article Citation:
Pallab Deb, Prabhat Kumar Rai

and Parimal C. Bhattacharjee.
A review on the distribution of Western Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolock hoolock) in
Northeast India.
Journal of Research in Biology (2014) 4(3): 1301-1310
J
o
u
r
n
a
l

o
f

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
n

B
i
o
l
o
g
y

A review on the distribution of Western Hoolock Gibbon
(Hoolock hoolock) in Northeast India
Keywords:
Western hoolock gibbon, Hoolock hoolock, Northeast India, southern Assam,
distribution, conservation.
ABSTRACT:

The Western hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock) occurs in the forests of
Northeastern India, found in the following states : Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura,
Meghalaya, Manipur, Nagaland and Mizoram. In this article, we discuss the published
information on distribution of Hoolock gibbons in Assam and other areas of Northeast.
Several studies were carried out on the presence or absence from the protected areas
but Hoolock gibbons are also present outside the protected areas particularly in
Reserve Forest (RF), Private Forest (PF) and Community Forest (CF) and Village
Reserve Forest (VRF). The distribution status of Hoolock gibbon in Northeast India is
still not conclusively known. In the presence of above facts, this paper briefly reviews
the studies on Western hoolock gibbon across its distribution range in Northeast India
because it is essential to understand the population status and distribution of any
endangered species like Hoolock gibbon for formulating action plan for their
conservation.
1301-1310 | JRB | 2014 | Vol 4 | No 3
This article is governed by the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/2.0), which gives permission for unrestricted use, non-commercial, distribution and
reproduction in all medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
www.jresearchbiology.com
Journal of Research in Biology
An International
Scientific Research Journal
Authors:
Pallab Deb
1*
,
Prabhat Kumar Rai
1
and
Parimal C. Bhattacharjee
2
.

Institution:
1. Department of
Environmental Science,
Mizoram University,
Aizawl, Mizoram, India.

2. Former Professor,
Department of Zoology,
Gauhati University, Assam,
India.

Corresponding author:
Pallab Deb.

Email Id:

Web Address:
http://jresearchbiology.com/
documents/RA0428.pdf.
Dates:
Received: 04 Mar 2014 Accepted: 22 Mar 2014 Published: 03 Jun 2014
An International Scientific Research Journal
Original Research
ISSN No: Print: 2231 6280; Online: 2231- 6299

INTRODUCTION
Hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock) a tree
dwelling ape, characterized by its white brows, also
known as White Browed Gibbon is the only ape found
in the Indian Subcontinent (Figure 1 and 2). In 2005,
Mootnick and Groves described Hoolock as two distinct
species, the Western hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock)
and the Eastern hoolock gibbon (Hoolock leuconedys).
The Western hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock) occurs
in the forests of Northeastern India, found in the
following states : Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura,
Meghalaya, Manipur, Nagaland and Mizoram. Where as
the Eastern hoolock gibbon (H. leuconedys) found only
in the state of Arunachal Pradesh and certain places of
Assam (Chetry and Chetry, 2011). There has been a
gradual decline by more than 90% in the population of
Hoolock gibbon in the wild because of several kinds of
human actions or human activities (Walker et al., 2007).
The species is threatened by habitat loss, shifting
agriculture, expansion of tea gardens and coffee estates,
various kinds of developmental projects, monoculture
tree plantations, hunting for food and traditional
medicine. (Choudhury, 1990, 1991, 1996a; Srivastava,
1999; Ahmed 2001; Malone et al., 2002; Solanki and
Chutia, 2004, Das et al., 2006; Walker et al., 2007). In
this article, we discuss the published information on
distribution of hoolock gibbons in Assam and other areas
of Northeast.
Hoolock Gibbon in Northeast India
The Northeastern region of India is most
significant as it represents the confluence of the Indo-
Malayan, Indo-Chinese and Indian biogeographical
realms. The Northeastern region is unique in providing a
profusion of habitats of various primates (Srivastava,
2006). The Hoolock gibbon was first described by
Harlan and Burrough (1834) and assigned to the genus
Hylobates by Blanford (1888-1891). Most of the earlier
descriptions of the Hoolock are of taxonomic interest or
natural history observations (Alfred and Sati, 1986).
After McCanns (1933) two months study on the
behavior of the Hoolock in the Naga Hills in 1930,
followed by an exploratory study conducted by Tilson
(1979) in the Hollangapar Reserve Forest in upper
Assam. Since 1980s , there has been a keen interest in
primate studies in Northeast. Several studies on the
Western hoolock gibbons population and distribution
status in Northeastern India were carried out by several
workers. In Assam (Tilson, 1979; Choudhury, 1990,
1996a, 1996b, 2000, 2001, 2009a, 2009b; Das et al.,
2003a, 2003b, 2004, 2005, 2009; Kakati, 2004, 2006;
Kakati et al., 2009), Tripura (Mukherjee, 1982; Gupta,
2001; Gupta and Dasgupta, 2005), Meghalaya (Alfred
and Sati, 1986, 1990; Choudhury, 1998, 2006; Gupta and
Sharma, 2005a; Sati, 2011), Mizoram (Misra et al., 1994;
Gupta and Sharma, 2005b; Choudhury, 2006), Nagaland
(McCann, 1933; Choudhury, 2006), Manipur
(Choudhury, 2006) and Arunachal Pradesh (Chetry et al.,
2003 and Kumar et al., 2009 and Das et al., 2009).
The presence of Hoolock gibbon in Manipur was
reported by Choudhury (2006). Hoolock gibbons were
located in the wildlife sanctuaries of Bunning, Jiri-
Makru, Kailam,Yangoupokpi-Lokchao and Zeilad.
According to Choudhury (2006) Hoolock gibbons are
also found in the Shiroi and Anko (Anggo Ching) ranges,
but the declining trend continues everywhere in Manipur.
Hoolock gibbons are still found in the jungle of Manipur
but it is very sad to learn that poaching is a serious threat
to this endangered species whose number is declining
day by day.
Hoolock gibbons are also present in Meghalaya.
Survey on Hoolock gibbon in Jaintia Hills was carried
out by Gupta and Sharma during the month of May 2003.
They carried out the survey in Narpuh Block-I RF and
Narpuh Block-II RF and the corridor area joining the
Narpuh RF ( Block-II ) with the Saipung Reserve Forest.
A total area of about 36.44 km
2
was surveyed in the
Jaintia Hills and 17 groups of gibbons were located
(Gupta and Sharma, 2005a). In Nongkhyllum wild life
Deb et al., 2014
1302 Journal of Research in Biology (2014) 4(3): 1301-1310
sanctuary 15 groups of Hoolock gibbon located in this
sanctuary, ten were located inside the sanctuary, four
groups in Reserve Forests and only one group was
located in a private forest at Umla (Gupta and Sharma,
2005a). A total of 39 groups of gibbon were located in
West Garo Hills including Nokrek National Park and
Nokrek Biosphere Reserve. The Balpakram National
Park (200km
2
) lies in the West Garo Hills and West
Khasi Hills districts of southern Meghalaya. A total of
three groups were located in Balpakram National Park
(Gupta and Sharma, 2005a). Four groups in Siju wild life
sanctuary and adjacent areas in South Garo Hills. They
also surveyed Baghmara Pitcher Plant Sanctuary and
Reserve Forest and found that five groups of Hoolock
gibbon are living inside the Baghmara Reserve Forests.
A total of 83 gibbon groups were recorded in this study.
Choudhury (2006) also reported the presence of Hoolock
gibbon in Balpakram and Nokrek national parks and in
the wild life sanctuaries of Nongkhyllum and Siju.
During a long-term study on the Hoolock gibbon in West
Garo Hills District, a detailed survey was made by
Alfred and Sati and a total of 42 family groups and four
solitary individuals of gibbons were recorded (Alfred and
Sati, 1990). J.P. Sati again conducted a survey on
Hoolock gibbon in West Garo Hills District in the year
2007. A total of 25 family groups of gibbons were
located in West Garo Hills (Sati, 2011). According to
Sati (2011) the diminishing trend of Hoolock gibbon
population is 26.2% in West Garo Hills District of
Meghalaya.
In Nagaland Gibbons have been recorded in all
the districts (Choudhury, 2006). They occur in Intanki
National Park and Fakim Wildlife Sanctuary and
Singphan Reserved Forest. But according to Choudhury
(2006) gibbon has disappeared from Pulie Badge and
Rangapahar Wildlife Sanctuaries.
Gupta and Sharma (2005b) estimated the
population of gibbons in all the existing protected areas
and the Reserved Forests of Mizoram. And they reported
72 groups of gibbons, only 3 (4.2%) groups were
actually sighted of the remaining groups, 20 groups
(27.8%) were located based on the songs heard during
the surveys and the presence of remaining 49 groups
(68%) were based on the secondary information (Gupta
and Sharma, 2005b). Hoolock gibbons are also present in
all the districts of Mizoram (Choudhury, 2006). Hoolock
gibbon present in all the wildlife sanctuaries and
National Parks of Mizoram. According to Choudhury
(2006) the existence of Hoolock Gibbon in Tawi
Wildlife Sanctuary is doubtful.
In Tripura, the presence of Hoolock gibbon was
reported by Mukherjee (1982). Gupta (2001) confirmed
Journal of Research in Biology (2014) 4(3): 1301-1310 1303
Deb et al., 2014
Figure 1. Western hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock),
Adult male. Photo: Pallab Deb
Figure 2. Western hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock),
Adult female. Photo: Pallab Deb

the presence of Hoolock Gibbon in Trishna and Gumti
Wildlife Sanctuaries. In 2005 Gupta and Dasgupta
recorded a total of 39 groups over an area of 53km
2
;
16 groups were confirmed through personal
communications with the local people and forest staff.
Songs were heard from 15 groups and only eight groups
were actually sighted.
In Arunachal Pradesh very few studies were
conducted on Gibbons till 2003. Chetry et al., (2003)
conducted a quantitative study in Namdapha National
Park on the population status of gibbons. And they
recorded ten groups with a total population of 33.
Another study on the distribution and population status
of Western hoolock gibbons in Namdapha National Park
was done by Kumar et al., (2009). They recorded a total
of twenty groups with a total population of 50. Eleven
groups (55%) were recorded by indirect observations
where as nine groups (45%) were observed directly. Das
et al., (2009) reported a total of 46 groups of Hoolock
gibbons in Arunachal Pradesh during their surveys in
2005-2006 with an average group size of 3.1 individuals.
The distribution status of Hoolock gibbon in
Assam was described by various researchers. Tilson
(1979) observed the behaviour of Hoolock gibbon in the
different seasons in Assam and he reported the group
size of 3.2 individuals for 25 groups and 3.4 for 7
groups. Choudhury (1990) studied the population
dynamics of Hoolock gibbon at 8 different groups in
Assam. Choudhury (2009a) has given a rough population
estimate of Karbi Anglong district of Assam indicates
that the total numbers of Hoolock gibbons today could be
between 2,400 and 3,200. This number can be compared
to an estimate in 1991-1992 of 3,500-4,800. The
distribution and status of Hoolock gibbon in Tinsukia
and Dibrugarh district was described by Choudhury
(2009b). According to him the Gibbon number was near
about 1,700 in 1995-1996 but recently their number may
be fewer than 1,300 individuals. Study on impact of
forest fragmentation on the Hoolock gibbon in Assam
was done by Kakati (2004, 2006). Kakati et al., (2009)
again carried out a survey in fragmented forests of
eastern Assam. The survey was conducted in Dibrugarh,
Digboi, Doom-Dooma and Tinsukia Forest Divisions in
2002. They found the encounter rates for Gibbon groups
were lowest in the small forest fragments and increasing
as the forest size increased . They recorded similar trends
with group sizes. Das et al., (2003a) recorded 80 areas as
Hoolock gibbon habitat in Northeastern India and a total
of 379 Gibbons were recorded and the number varied
from 1 to 25 among these areas. Das et al., (2009)
estimated the population of Hoolock gibbons in Assam
to be around 4,500-5,500 individuals (excluding solitary
individuals), and the total area of Gibbon habitat as
7,369km
2
. Today, most of the forest patches in Assam
are small and isolated. Such small size and scattered
forest fragments unable to support above 300 gibbon
population and some scattered forest fragments contain
one pair of gibbon (Das et al., 2009). Das et al., (2011)
identified ten priority conservation areas for long term
conservation of Hoolock gibbon in Assam. Each priority
conservation area include a cluster of wild life
sanctuaries, reserved forests and proposed reserved
forests. These conservation areas or forest complexes
have the greatest potential for long term conservation of
Western hoolock gibbon in Assam. Of these ten priority
conservation areas of Assam, Karbi Anglong district of
central Assam, comprises five priority conservation
areas, two priority conservation areas are in Southern
part of Assam. One priority conservation areas is in
Dibrugarh and Tinsukia districts and Kamrup and
Nawgaon districts has one each. Five priority
conservation areas or forest complexes out of these ten
have been identified from Karbi Anglong. Of these five
priority complexes, the Langlakso-Mikir Hills-Kalyoni
complex and Borjuri-Jungthung-Western Mikir Hills
forest complex are two important forest complexes of
Karbi Anglong district, prioritized for long term
conservation of western Hoolock gibbon in the state
Deb et al., 2014
(Biswas et al., 2013). Biswas et al., (2013) has
undertaken a survey of these two priority complexes to
know the habitat quality and status of the western
Hoolock gibbon. They recorded a total of 80 individuals
with 27 family groups of Hoolock gibbon during the
survey. From Langlakso-Mikir Hills-Kalyoni forest
complex they recorded 61 individuals in 20 family
groups and from Borjuri-Jungthung-Western Mikir Hills
forest complex they recorded 19 individuals in seven
family groups and the overall family groups ranging
from two to five individuals (Biswas et al., 2013). They
estimated the population of Hoolock gibbon in
Langlakso-Mikir Hills-Kalyoni forest complex between
682 to 871 groups and 2015 to 2578 individuals with the
mean number predicted at approximately 2296. Similarly
the population of Hoolock gibbon in Borjuri-Jungthung-
West Mikir Hills forest complex between 157 to 193
groups and 465 to 571 individuals with the mean number
predicted as approximately 518.
Hoolock Gibbon in Southern part of Assam
Southern region of Assam is known as Barak
Valley. The region is named after its main river
Barak. Hoolock gibbons are found in the various parts
of Barak Valley in Assam (Choudhury, 2004; Dattagupta
et al., 2010; Das et al., 2003a; Das et al., 2011; Deb
et al., 2010-11; Islam et al., 2013). In the Southern part
of Assam, Hoolock Gibbons are found in Barail
Protected Reserve Forest, North Cachar Hills Reserve
Forest, Innerline Reserve Forest, Barail Reserve Forest,
Katakhal Reserve Forest, Longai Reserve Forest, Singla
Reserve Forest and Patharia Reserve Forest (Das et al.,
2003a). When identifying ten priority forest complexes
Das et al., (2011) emphasized on two basic criteria,
habitat integrity and biological importance for long-term
conservation of Hoolock gibbon in Assam. Out of ten
priority forest complexes in Assam two priority forest
complexes are in Barak Valley viz. Innerline-Kathakhal-
Singhla-Barak complex and Barail Wildlife Sanctuary-
Barail protected Reserve Forest-Unclassified forest north
of Barail WLS-North Cacher Complex. Hoolock gibbons
are also found in several tea estates of Barak Valley. Deb
et al., (2010-11) reported the existence of Hoolock
gibbons in Rosekandy and Silcoorie tea estates. Islam
et al., (2013) reported the presence of 10 family groups
of Hoolock gibbons with a total population of 33 in
Innerline Reserved Forest of Barak Valley.
Hoolock gibbon habitat is usually the closed
canopy of tropical evergreen forests, tropical wet
evergreen forests, tropical semi-evergreen, tropical moist
deciduous and subtropical hill forests in India (Srivastava
1999; Molur et al., 2005). The species is threatened by
anthropogenic activity such as fuelwood collection, use
of forest resources and forest land, extracting medicinal
plants and wild vegetables and mainly because of
agricultural activities. Such kind of anthropogenic
activity leads fragmentation of habitat (Kumar et al.,
2009). Habitat fragmentation restricts the movement of
Hoolock gibbon through the canopy in search of food.
Hoolock gibbon generally eat fruits, leaves and flowers.
When their preferable food is insufficient gibbon also
consume bamboo shoots (Kumar et al., 2013). Hoolock
gibbon is mostly frugivorous but during winter season
the choice shifted from fruit to leaves (Kakati, 2006).
The distribution status of Hoolock gibbon in Northeast
India is still not conclusively known. Several studies
were carried out on the presence or absence from the
protected areas but Hoolock gibbon also present in
outside protected areas particularly in Reserve Forest
(RF), Private Forest (PF), Community Forests (CF) and
Village Reserve Forest (VRF).
Conservation
Tropical and subtropical forest of Northeast India
is the habitat of Hoolock gibbon in India. But the
declining trend of Hoolock gibbon population continues
in its entire distributional range (Kumar et al., 2013).
Hoolock gibbons are protected by law in India. But it is
unfortunate that their conservation has not been taken up
seriously till date. The communities living in or near the
Deb et al., 2014

Hoolock gibbon habitat depends on forest resources and
bad economic conditions along with population influx
play devastating role in respect of survival parameters of
this species. Hoolock hoolock is listed by the IUCN Red
List of Threatened Species as Endangered. The species
was listed on Schedule-I, the highest schedule on the
Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act in 1972 and also in
Appendix-I of CITES. Western hoolock gibbon is also
included in the list of 25 most endangered primate
species of world (Walker et al., 2009). There are various
conservation efforts for Hoolock gibbon but the species
is still not out of danger. The Government of India is not
serious enough about the conservation issues affecting
the countrys only ape species (Chetry and Chetry,
2011). Immediate step for conservation of Hoolock
gibbon is to initiate baseline research both in captivity
and in the wild. The species is distributed across nine
zoos in India with a total of 40 numbers (Srivastav and
Nigam, 2009). The species has a poor breeding history in
captivity in Indian zoos. However, the species has a
number of animals which have the potential to contribute
their genes to the captive population (Srivastav and
Nigam, 2009). To create environment of ex-situ
conservation awareness and to initiate captive breeding
programme for selected endangered species of the
region, Aizawl Zoological Park, Mizoram was
established in 2002. Every effort has been made to
provide required housing, feed and health care to all the
animals in the zoo as per Central Zoo Authority of India
technical guidance and financial support. According to
annual inventory of Aizawl Zoological Park 2007-2008,
of mammals, the opening stock of Hoolock gibbon as on
01.04.2007 was one male and four female, a total of five
individuals and closing stock as on 31.03.2008 was a
total of seven individuals with two male and five female
gibbons because of acquisition of one male and one
female gibbon. No news of captive breeding of Hoolock
gibbon during that period of time (Mizoram State
Pollution Control Board, 2009). But the present status of
male Hoolock gibbon in Aizawl Zoological Park is not
clear. For successful captive breeding of Hoolock gibbon
Central Zoo Authority of India can adopt co-operative
breeding programme with other zoos in North East India
by transferring animals and sharing their off-springs. For
conservation of Hoolock gibbon in the wild need a
detailed strategy action plan for the future conservation.
Das et al., (2011) already identified ten priority
conservation areas or forest complexes which have the
greatest potential for long term conservation of western
Hoolock gibbon in Assam. Similar identification of
priority forest complexes are required in other North
Eastern states. All the states of North East India have a
huge conservation scope but despite of having
conservation scope Hoolock gibbon is facing enormous
anthropogenic pressure ranging from habitat loss,
encroachment, fragmentation and hunting throughout the
entire distribution range making the species extremely
vulnerable. The primates and the local people directly
dependent on the same forest resource for their basic
requirements is the main cause for concern (Kumar et al.,
2009). Most local people are unaware about the legal
status of Hoolock gibbon and lack of trust towards forest
department are big conservation problem (Biswas et al.,
2013).

CONCLUSION
For conservation of this species the government
should start a Hoolock gibbon project through out the
entire distribution range of the species to determine the
present distribution, population status and evaluate
different kinds of threats. It will give a baseline
information to formulate area specific action plan. We
need to provide alternative livelihood to the people
settling in and around the Protected Areas, Reserve
Forest, Protected Forest etc. Community education
program for local people could encourage the local
community to participate in the management process.
We hope that Hoolock gibbon shall continue their loud
Deb et al., 2014
songs in the jungle of North East India in the coming
years without any disturbances.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We dedicate this study to all the primatologists
for providing valuable literatures on Western Hoolock
gibbon. First author would like to thank Dr. Jayanta Das
(Wildlife Areas Development & Welfare Trust, Assam)
for his guidance. First author is also thankful to Dr.
Mrinal Kanti Bhattacharya (Department of Botany &
Biotechnology, Karimganj College, Karimganj, Assam)
for his untiring support.

REFERENCES
Ahmed A. 2001. Illegal trade, and utilization of primates
in India. In: Gupta, A.K. (ed.) Non-human Primates of
India, ENVIS Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas. 1
(1): 177-184.

Alfred JRB and Sati JP. 1986. The gibbons with
special reference to Hylobates Hoolock, p. 384-390. In:
Majupuria, T.C. (ed.) Wildlife Wealth of India:
Resources and Management. Tec. Press Service,
Bangkok.

Alfred JRB and Sati JP. 1990. Survey and census of
the hoolock gibbon in West Garo Hills, Northeast India.
Primates. 31(2): 299-306.

Biswas J, Taro R, Ronghang A and Das J. 2013.
Conservation of Western Hoolock Gibbon Hoolock
hoolock in Langlakso-Mikir Hills Kalyoni and Borjuri-
Jungthung-Western Mikir Hills Landscape, Assam,
India. Final Report of Primate Research Centre NE India
and Peoples Trust for Endangered Species Collaborative
Project. ( NO. PRCNE/Tecr-8), J. Biswas (editor). 1-49.

Blanford WT. 1888-1891. The Fauna of British India,
including Ceylon and Burma: Mammalia. Taylor and
Francis, London.

Chetry D and Chetry R. 2011. Hoolock gibbon
conservation in India. Gibbon Journal. Nr.6 :7-12.

Chetry D, Medhi R, Biswas J, Das D and
Bhattacharjee PC. 2003. Non-human Primates in the
Namdapha National Park, Arunachal Pradesh, India.
International Journal of Primatology. 24(2): 383-388.

Choudhury A. 2009a. The Distribution, Status and
Conservation of Hoolock Gibbon, Hoolock hoolock, in
Karbi Anglong District, Assam, Northeast India, Primate
Conservation. 24:117-126.

Choudhury A. 1990. Population dynamics of Hoolock
Gibbons (Hylobates hoolock) in Assam, India. American
Journal of Primatology. 20(1): 37-41.

Choudhury A. 1991. Ecology of the Hoolock Gibbon
(Hylobates hoolock), a lesser ape in the tropical forests
of north-eastern India. Journal of Tropical Ecology. 7(1):
147-153.

Choudhury A. 1996b. Primates in Bherjan, Borajan and
Podumani Reserve Forests of Assam, India, Asian
Primates. 5 (3-4):10-11.

Choudhury A. 1996a. A survey of Hoolock Gibbon
(Hylobates hoolock) in southern Assam, India. Primate
report. 44: 77-85.

Choudhury A. 1998. A survey of primates in the Jaintia
Hills. ASP Bulletin. 22(3): 8-9.

Choudhury A. 2000. A survey of Hoolock Gibbon
(Hylobates hoolock) in Dibru-Saikhowa National Park,
Assam, India. Primate Report. 56:61-66.

Choudhury A. 2001. Primates in northeast India: An
overview of their distribution and conservation status .
ENVIS Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas. 1(1):92-
101.

Choudhury A. 2004. Vanishing habitat threatens
Phayres leaf monkey. The Rhino Foundation. NE India
Deb et al., 2014
Newsletter. 6:32-33.

Choudhury A. 2006. The distribution and status of
Hoolock Gibbon, Hoolock hoolock, in Manipur,
Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Nagaland in Northeast India.
Primate Conservation. 20: 79-87.

Choudhury A. 2009b. The Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolock
hoolock) in Tinsukia and Dibrugarh Districts of Assam,
India, Asian Primates Journal. 1(2):24-30.

Das J, Biswas J, Bhattacharjee PC and Mohnot SM.
2009. The distribution and abundance of hoolock
gibbons in India. In: S Lappan , DJ Whittaker, Eds. The
Gibbons. Springer, New York. p. 409-433.

Das J, Biswas J, Medhi R, Bose J, Chetry D,
Bujorborua P and Begum F. 2003b. Distributional
status of Hoolock Gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock) and
their conservation in southern Assam, India. Tiger paper.
30(4): 26-29.

Das J, Biswas J, Das N, Molur S and Bagley F. 2011.
Strategic plan for western hoolock gibbon conservation
in Assam, India. Gibbon Journal Nr. 6. Gibbon
Conservation Alliance, Zurich, Switzerland. 30-33.

Das J, Biswas J, Bhattacharjee PC and Mohnot SM.
2006. First distribution records of the Eastern Hoolock
Gibbon Hoolock hoolock leuconedys from India. Zoos
Print Journal. 21(7): 2316-2320.

Das J, Feeroz MM, Islam MA, Biswas J, Bujarborua
P, Chetry D, Medhi R and Bose J. 2003a. Distribution
of Hoolock Gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock hoolock) in
India and Bangladesh. Zoos Print Journal. 18(1): 969-
976.

Das J, Bhattacharjee PC, Biswas J and Chetry D.
2005. Western Hoolock Gibbon: Socioecology, Threats
and Conservation Action Plan. Department of Zoology,
Gauhati University, and Primate Research Centre,
Northeast Centre, Guwahati, India. 70p.
Das J, Bhattacharjee PC, Biswas J and Chetry D.
2004. Western Hoolock Gibbon: Socioecology, Threats
and Conservation Action Plan. A report of Primate
Research Center, Gauhati University, Assam. India. 70p.

Dattagupta S, Gupta A and Ghose M. 2010. Non-
Timber Forest Products of the Inner Line Reserve Forest,
Cachar, Assam, India: dependency and usage Pattern of
forest-dwellers. Assam University journal of Science &
Technology: Biological and Environmental Sciences.
6(1):21-27.

Deb M, Roychoudhury S and Bhattacharjee PC. 2010
-11. Hoolock Gibbon: An Endangered Ape of Northeast
India and its Conservation. Biotech, An Annual Journal
of Dept. of Biotechnology. 3(1): 21-25.

Gupta AK and Sharma N. 2005a. Conservation status
of Hoolock gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock) in
Meghalaya. In: Gupta, A.K., N. Sharma, S. Dasgupta, D.
Chakraborty & R. Hazarika (eds.) Conservation of
Hoolock Gibbon in Northeast India. ENVIS Bulletin:
Wildlife and Protected Areas. 8: 87-150.

Gupta AK and Sharma N. 2005b. Conservation status
of Hoolock gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock) in Mizoram.
In: Gupta, A.K., N. Sharma, S. Dasgupta, D.
Chakraborty & R. Hazarika (eds.) Conservation of
Hoolock Gibbon in Northeast India. ENVIS Bulletin:
Wildlife and Protected Areas. 8: 27-86.

Gupta AK and Dasgupta S. 2005. Conservation status
of Hoolock Gibbon (Bunopithecus hoolock) in Tripura.
ENVIS Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas. 8: 151-
170.

Gupta AK. 2001. Status of Primates in Tripura. ENVIS
Bulletin: Wildlife and Protected Areas, Non-Human
Primates in India.1(1), 127-135.

Harlan R and Burrough M. 1834. Description of a
species of Orang, from the North-Eastern Province of
Deb et al., 2014
British East India, Lately the Kingdom of Assam.
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 4:52
-59.

Islam M, Choudhury P and Bhattacharjee PC. 2013.
Preliminary study on Population status and Activity
budgeting of Western Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolock
hoolock) in the Inner-Line Reserved Forest of Barak
Valley, Assam, India. International Journal of Scientific
and Research Publications. 3(3).1-8.

Kakati K. 2004. Impact of forest fragmentation on the
hoolock gibbon in Assam, India. PhD thesis, University
of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Kakati K. 2006. Fragment-living- a study of hoolock
gibbons in Assam, India. The Gibbons Voice 8(1): 1-4.

Kakati K, Raghavan R, Chellam R, Qureshi Q and
Chivers DJ. 2009. Status of Western hoolock gibbon
(Hoolock hoolock) populations in fragmented forests of
eastern Assam. Primate Conservation 24:127-137.

Kumar A, Devi A, Gupta AK and Sarma K. 2013.
Population, Behavioural Ecology and Conservation of
Hoolock Gibbon in Northeast India. Rare Animals of
India. 242-266.

Kumar A, Mary PP and Bagchie P. 2009. Present
distribution, population status, and conservation of
western Hoolock gibbons Hoolock hoolock (Primates:
Hylobatidae) in Namdapha National Park, India. Journal
of Threatened Taxa. 1(4): 203-210.

Malone N, Purnama AR, Wedana M and Fuentes A.
2002. Assessment of the sale of primates at Indonesian
bird markets. Asian Primate 8(1-2):7-11.

McCann C. 1933. Notes on the colouration and habits of
the White-browed Gibbon or Hoolock (Hylobates
hoolock Harl.). Journal of Bombay Natural History
Society 36:395-405.

Misra C, Raman T and Johnsingh A. 1994. Survey of
primates, serow, and goral in Mizoram. Report, Wildlife
Institute of India, Dehra Dun.

Mizoram State Pollution Control Board (MSPCB).
2009. Mizo-Envis. News Letter, 3(2):5-7.

Molur S, Walker S, Islam A, Miller P, Srinivasulu C,
Nameer PO, Daniel BA and Ravikumar L. 2005.
Conservation of Western Hoolock Gibbon ( Hoolock
hoolock hoolock) in India and Bangladesh: Population
and Habitat Viability Assessment (P.H.V.A.) Workshop
Report, 2005. Zoo Outreach organisation/ CBSG-South
Asia, Coimbatore, India. 132p.

Mootnick A and Groves C. 2005. A new generic name
for the hoolock gibbon (Hylobatidae). International
Journal of Primatology 26(4):971-976.

Mukherjee RP. 1982. Survey of non-human primates of
Tripura. India. Journal of Zoological Society of India. 34
(1-2): 70-81.

Sati JP. 2011. Current status of Western Hoolock gibbon
Hoolock hoolock Harlan in west Garo Hills, Meghalaya,
India. Journal of Threatened Taxa. 3(2): 1520-1526.

Solanki GS and Chutia P. 2004. Ethno Zoological and
Socio-cultural aspects of Monpas of Arunachal Pradesh.
Journal of Human Ecology. 15(4): 251-254.

Srivastava A. 1999. Primates of Northeast India.
Megadiversity Press, Bikaner, 208p.

Srivastava A. 2006. Conservation of threatened primates
of Northeast India. Primate Conservation. 20:107-113.

Srivastav A and Nigam P. 2009. National Studbook of
Hoolock Gibbon (Hoolock hoolock). Wildlife Institute of
India, Dehradun and Central Zoo Authority, New Delhi.
1-24.

Tilson RL. 1979. Behaviour of Hoolock Gibbon
(Hylobates hoolock) during different seasons in Assam,
Deb et al., 2014
India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society. 76
(1):1-16.

Walker S, Molur S and Brockelman WY. 2007.
Western Hoolock Gibbon, Hoolock hoolock
(Harlan,1831).pp.18. In: Primates in Peril: The Worlds
25 Most Endangered Primates 2006-2008, Mittermeier,
R.A., J. Ratsimbazafy, A.B. Rylands, L. Williamson, J.F.
Oates, D. Mbora, J.U. Ganzhorn, E. Rodriguez-Luna, E.
Palacios, E.W. Heymann, M.C.M.Kierulff, L.
Yongcheng, J. Supriatna, C. Roos, S. Walker and J.M.
Aguiar. Primate Conservation. 22:1-40.

Walker S, Molur S, Brockelman WY, Das J, Islam A,
Geissmann T and Peng-Fei F. 2009. Western hoolock
gibbon Hoolock hoolock (Harlan, 1831). In: Mittermeier
RA, Janette Wallis, Anthony B. Rylands, Jrg U.
Ganzhorn, John F. Oates, Elizabeth A. Williamson,
Erwin Palacios, Eckhard W. Heymann, M. Ceclia M.
Kierulff, Long Yongcheng, Jatna Supriatna, Christian
Roos, Sally Walker, Liliana Corts-Ortiz, and Christoph
Schwitzer. Eds. Primates in Peril: The Worlds 25 Most
Endangered Primates 2008-2010, IUCN/SSC Primate
Specialist Group (PSG), International Primatological
Society (IPS), and Conservation International (CI),
Arlington, VA, p. 62-64.
Deb et al., 2014
Submit your articles online at www.jresearchbiology.com

Advantages
Easy online submission
Complete Peer review
Affordable Charges
Quick processing
Extensive indexing
You retain your copyright

submit@jresearchbiology.com

www.jresearchbiology.com/Submit.php.
Article Citation:
Seino Richard Akwanjoh, Dongmo Tonleu Ingrid, Dongmo Alain and Manjeli Yacouba.
Meiosis and Chromosome Complement of Atractomorpha lata (=A. bedeli)
(Mochulsky, 1866) (Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae) Collected in Cameroon.
J
o
u
r
n
a
l

o
f

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
n

B
i
o
l
o
g
y

Meiosis and Chromosome Complement of Atractomorpha lata (=A. bedeli)
(Mochulsky, 1866) (Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae) Collected in Cameroon.
Keywords:
Atractomorpha lata, Pyrgomorphidae, karyotype, meiosis.
ABSTRACT:

This article presents detailed information on the meiotic process and
karyotype of Atractomorpha lata (=A. bedeli), a Pyrgomorphidae grasshopper endemic
to the West and North-West Regions of Cameroon. It includes chromosome number,
morphology and chromosome lengths. The meiotic process in the species was normal
and chiasmate with a mean chiasma frequency of 12.874 0.29. The percent rod
shaped bivalents present was significantly higher (P<0.05) than percent ring shaped
bivalents. Percent bivalents with 1, 2 and 3 chiasmata were in the series: 1 chiasmata
> 2 chiasmata > 3 chiasmata. The X chromosome revealed the reversal type of
heteropycnosis. The detailed karyotype of A. lata from Cameroon (Africa) is here
described for the first time. The species has a diploid karyotype of 23 and the sex
mechanism is XX XO. Short chromosome arms were visible in mitotic Metaphase
chromosomes hence the chromosomes in the species were acrocentric. The karyotype
revealed three large, five medium and one small chromosomes (3LL 5MM 1SS).
Chromosome lengths varied from 8.40 to 2.10m and the haploid set was 56.39m
long. The X chromosome was 5.6m and medium in size.
1311-1316 | JRB | 2014 | Vol 4 | No 3

An International
Authors:
Seino Richard Akwanjoh
1, 4,
Dongmo Tonleu Ingrid
1
,
Dongmo Alain
2
and Manjeli
Yacouba
3
.

Institution:
1. Department of Animal
Biology, Faculty of Science,
University of Dschang,
P.O. Box 353 Dschang,
Cameroon.

2. Laboratoire de Biologie et de
Physiologie des Organismes
Animaux, Facult des Sciences,
Universit de Douala,
Cameroon.

3. Department of Biotechnology
and Animal Production, Faculty
of Agronomy and Agricultural
Sciences, University of
Dschang, P.O. Box 222
Dschang, Cameroon.

4. Department of Biological
Science, Faculty of Science,
University of Bamenda,
P.O. Box 39 Bamenda,
Cameroon

Seino Richard Akwanjoh.

Email Id:

Web Address:
Dates:
Received: 16 Apr 2013 Accepted: 23 May 2013 Published: 03 Jun 2014
Original Research

INTRODUCTION
Atractomorpha lata (=A. bedeli) is a common
grasshopper found in the West and North-West Regions
of Cameroon. Though this species has been reportedly a
pest of rice and Medicinal plants on the Asian continent
(Anonymous, 1972; Kobayashi et al., 1972; Lee et al.,
2007), it is yet to be implicated with pest activities in
Cameroon or on the African continent.
Karyotype is an important asset of a species and
can serve for identification purposes (Channaveerappa
and Ranganath, 1997). It is also a useful tool in
cytotaxonomic, evolutionary and phylogenetic studies
(Verma and Agarwal, 2005). A review of Sannomiya
(1973), John and King, (1983) and Yao et al., (2004),
revealed that some Atractomorpha species have
karyotypes with chromosome numbers that vary from
2n = 19 to 38 acro-telocentric chromosomes. This
variation in chromosome number is due principally due
to the presence of supernumerary chromosomes. Up to
19 B, chromosomes have been reported in some
populations of Atractomorpha species.
There is a paupacy in literature of cytogenetic
information for Cameroonian (African) Atractomorpha
species. This report is therefore a first description of the
karyotype and meiotic process in the African A. lata
(=bedeli) collected from Cameroon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Ten male individuals used for this study were
collected on the Campus of the University of Dschang,
Cameroon. Two of the insects were pre-treated with
colchicine to ensure that mitotic chromosomes were
obtained while the others were not so treated in order to
easily obtain meiotic chromosomes (Tepperberg et al.,
1997).
Mitotic and meiotic chromosomes were
respectively obtained from individuals treated with 1%
colchicine and untreated individuals of A. lata.
Chromosome smears were prepared with the Lactic
Propionic Orcein squash technique of Seino et al.,
(2012a). Testes fixed in 3:1 Ethanol: Acetic acid were
squashed on clean microscope glass slides and stained
with 2% lactic propionic orcien.
The meiotic process was assessed by
examination of stages and substages present. Chiasma
frequencies were counted from ten cells in Diplotene/
Diakenesis in ten individuals. Mitotic Metaphase
chromosomes were measured directly from the Lietz
photomicroscope with the help of the ocular and stage
micrometres. Chromosome morphology was determined
from the presence of minute short arms and confirmed
using the shapes of the chromosomes in first meiotic
anaphases and second meiotic metaphases and
anaphases. Chromosome size groups were determined
from Relative Chromosome Lengths (RCL) and
separated using the Duncans Multiple Range Test
(DMRT).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Meiotic process
The meiotic stages observed in this species are
Prophase -1 (Zygotene, Pachytene, and Diplotene),
Metaphase -1, Anaphase -1, Telophase-1, Metaphase- 2
and Anaphase -2 (Figure.1). In Diplotene (Figure. 1d),
chiasmata were present. There was no precocious
movement of chromosomes in Anaphase- 1(Figure. 1f).
As per the criteria of Verma and Agarwal, (2005), the
meiotic process in this species was judged as normal and
chiasmate. This type of meiotic process is reportedly
ancestral and characteristic for the Orthoptera (White,
1973; Hewitt, 1979). Chiasma frequency per cell varied
from 11 16 with a mode of 13 and a mean of
12.840.29. A perusal of Table 1 revealed the mean
percent rod shaped bivalents (69.2%) to be significantly
higher (P<0.05) than the mean percent ring shaped
bivalents (32.9%). Also the mean percent bivalents with
1, 2 and 3 chiasmata were in the series: 1 chiasmata
(67.1%) > 2 chiasmata (23.1%) > 3 chiasmata
Seino et al., 2014
(9.7%). Similar observations have been reported for
Taphronota thaelephora and Dictyophorus griseus
(Seino et al., 2012 a and b). The X chromosome stained
darker than the autosomes in Prophase-1 but stained
lighter than the autosomes in Metaphase-1 and
Anaphase-1, therefore exhibiting the reversal type of
heteropycnosis. Reversal heteropycnosis has been
considered characteristic of the Orthoptera grasshoppers
(White, 1973; Hewitt, 1979).
Karyotype
Few karyotype studies have been done on
African Pyrgomorphidae in general and of species from
Cameroon in particular. Mitotic Metaphase chromosome
counts revealed 19 chromosomes in males (Figure. 2).
There were also 9 bivalents and one univalent X
chromosome in Diplotene and Metaphase -1. Therefore
the diploid chromosome number for A. lata was 19
(2n=19) with the XX XO sex determining
mechanism. This is another example of the characteristic
Pyrgomorphidae karyotype since Pyrgomorphidae
species show karyotype uniformity with 19
chromosomes (White, 1973; Hewitt, 1979; Seino et al.,
2012 a & b). The chromosome number recorded for
A. lata in this study is in agreement with that recorded
for A bedeli (Sannomiya; 1973; 1978) and seven
Atractomorpha species (A. sinensis, A. burri,
A. yunnanensis, A. peregrina, A. sagittaris, A. psittacina
and A. lata) in Guizhou (Yao et al., 2004). However
presence of B chromosomes (varying from 1 7) in the
Tofuwato Japan population of A. Bedeli (=lata)
reported by Sannomiya (1973) is not found in this
Cameroonian population.
Seino et al., 2014
b c
d
a
e
f
g
h i
Figure 1: Meiotic stages in Atractomorpha lata: a) Leptotene; b) Zygotene;
c) Pachytene; d) Diplotene; e) Metaphase- 1; f) Anaphase -1; g) Early
Telophase -1; h) Anaphase -2; i) Telophase -2; Arrow = X- chromosome;
ch = chiasma; ct = centromere

The chromosomes of A. lata were all
characterised by being a simple rod type with a near
terminal attachment at the tapering ends. Short
chromosome arms were present in most of the
chromosomes (Figure.2). Centromeres were therefore in
the near terminal regions of the chromosomes. As per the
criteria of Levan et al., (1964), the chromosomes in
A. lata collected in Cameroon were therefore acrocentric
in morphology. The acrocentric nature of these
chromosomes was confirmed by the V-shaped nature of
the chromosomes in Anaphase -1 (Figure1 f) and the
I -shaped nature of the chromosomes in Anaphase- 2
(Figure. 1i) (William and Ogunbiyi, 1995). No secondary
constrictions were observed.
The individual chromosomes were also
characterised by length. A perusal of Table 2 revealed
that chromosomes in A. lata ranged from 7.52 to 3.42m
and the total haploid length (including the X
chromosome) was 56.39 m. The X chromosome was
5.6m long. The chromosomes were occurred in three
sizes; long, medium and short (Figure. 3) (Table 3).
There were 3 long, 5 medium and 1 short chromosome
pairs (3LL: 5MM: 1SS). The X- chromosome was
medium (Table 3). Chromosomes in most Orthoptera
grasshoppers occur in size groups of long, medium and
short (White, 1973; Seino et al., 2012 a and b). This
report is in agreement with the report of Yao et al.,
(2004) who also observed the chromosomes of seven
Seino et al., 2014
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 X
Chromosome pair
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

C
h
r
o
m
o
s
o
m
e

L
e
n
g
t
h

(
R
C
L
)
Figure. 3: Idiogram of karyotype of A. lata. The
chromosomes occur in size groups of long, medium and
short (3LL: 5MM: 1SS). The X chromosome is medium.
Table 1: Mean chiasma frequency per cell, percent rod and ring shaped bivalents and percent bivalents with
1-, 2- and 3- chiasmata determined from ten cells in Diplotene of Atractomorpha lata.

Mean Cell
Chiasma
Frequency
Rod shaped
bivalents
Ring shaped
bivalents
Bivalents with
1- chiasma
Bivalents with
2 -chiasmata
Bivalents with
3 -chiasmata
X % X % X % X % X %
A.lata 12.840.29 0.692 69.2 0.329 32.9 0.671 67.1 0.231 23.1 0.097 9.7
Table 2: Mitotic Metaphase chromosome lengths (m) and long: short arm ratio in Atractomorpha lata

chromosome
1m 2m 3m 4m 5m 6m 7m 8m 9m 10m
Total length 7.52 6.93 6.91 5.65 5.18 5.08 5.04 5.03 3.42 6.1
Long arm 6.49 5.91 5.92 5.04 4.22 4.20 4.03 4.22 2.8 5.3
Short arm 1.03 1.02 0.99 0.61 0.96 0.88 1.01 0.81 0.62 0.8
Long arm: short arm ratio 6.60 5.79 5.98 8.26 4.40 4.77 3.99 5.21 4.52 6.63
Figure. 2: Mitotic Metaphase chromosomes in A. lata.
Short chromosome arms (arrowed) are visible in
most of the chromosomes
Atractomorpha species collected in Guizhou to occur in
three size groups of long medium and short. However,
the X chromosome in this study was medium in size
while in the Guizhou species of Atractomorpha the X
chromosome was the longest chromosome in the
genome.
The apparent absence of B chromosomes in this
study does not dismiss the existence of supernumeraries
in Cameroonian populations of A. lata (= bedeli). The
presence of B chromosomes are known to vary with
population (Camacho et al., 2000). During this study no
meiotic and karyotype aberrations were detected.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We are deeply indebted to Mr Akongte Peter,
MSc student in the Department of Animal Biology of the
University of Dschang, Cameroon, who collected the
specimens used for this study. Our sincere thanks go to
Professor Mpoame Mbida, Head of the Applied Ecology
Laboratory (LABEA), Department of Animal Biology in
the University of Dschang, Cameroon, for laboratory
facilities.

REFERENCES
Anonymous. 1972. A list of plant diseases, insect pests
and weeds in Korea; Seoul, Korean Society of Plant
Protection, 424.

Camacho JPM, Sharbel TF and Beukeboom LW.
2000. B-chromosome Evolution. Phil. Trans. R. Soc.
Lond., 355(1394): 163 178.

Channaveerappa H and Ranganath H. 1997.
Karyology of a few species of South Indian acridids. II.
Male germ line karyotypic instability in Gastrimaargus.
Journal of Biosciences, 22(3): 367 374.

John B and King M. 1983. Population cytogenetics of
Atractomorpha similes I. C-band variation. Chromosoma
88(1): 57 -68.
Seino et al., 2014

S
p
e
c
i
e
s

T
o
t
a
l

n
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

c
h
r
o
m
o
s
o
m
e
s

p
e
r

c
e
l
l

i
n

t
h
e

m
a
l
e

S
e
x

d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
i
n
g

m
e
c
h
a
n
i
s
m

N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

c
h
r
o
m
o
s
o
m
e

p
e
r

s
i
z
e

g
r
o
u
p

T
o
t
a
l

c
h
r
o
m
o
s
o
m
e

l
e
n
g
t
h

(
m
)

(
H
a
p
l
o
i
d

s
e
t
)

M
o
r
p
h
o
l
o
g
y

o
f

c
h
r
o
m
o
s
o
m
e
s

L
e
n
g
t
h

(
m

)

o
f

X

c
h
r
o
m
o
s
o
m
e

S
i
z
e

o
f

X

c
h
r
o
m
o
s
o
m
e

L
o
n
g

M
e
d
i
u
m

S
h
o
r
t

A
.

l
a
t
a

1
9

X
X
-
X
O

3

5

1

5
6
.
3
9

m

A
l
l

A
c
r
o
c
e
n
t
r
i
c

5
.
6
3

m

M
e
d
i
u
m

T
a
b
l
e

3
:

M
o
r
p
h
o
m
e
t
r
i
c

c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
s

o
f

t
h
e

k
a
r
y
o
t
y
p
e

o
f

A
.

l
a
t
a

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

C
a
m
e
r
o
o
n

Hewitt GM. 1979. Grasshoppers and Crickets. Animal
cytogenetics. Insecta, I. Orthoptera. Vol. 3. Grebruger
Borntraeger Ed. Berlin Stuttgart.

Kobayashi T, Hasegawa T and Kegasawa K. 1972.
Major insect pests of leguminous crops in Japan. Trop.
Agric. Res. Ser., Japan, 6: 109 126.

Lee DW, Park JC, Kim DS, Kim CS and Choo HY.
2007. Kinds and occurring time of insect pests in
medicinal plant Garden. Http://agris.fao.org/aos/records/
KR2008003318.

Levan A, Fredga K and Sondberg AA. 1964.
Nomenclature for centric position of chromosomes.
Hereditas, 52(2): 201 - 220.

Sannomiya M. 1973. Cytogenetic studies on normal
populations of grasshoppers with special reference to B-
chromosomes. I. Atractomorpha bedeli. Chromosoma
44: 99 - 106.

Sannomiya M. 1978. Relationship between crossing-
over and chiasma formation in a translocation
heterozygote of Atractomorpha bedeli (Acrididae,
Orthoptera). Heredity 40(2): 305 - 308.

Seino RA, Tongleu ID and Manjeli Y. 2012a.
Cyotgenetic characterisation of Taphronota thaelephora
Stal.1873.(Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae) from
Cameroon. II. Description of mitotic chromosomes.
International Journal of Biological and Chemical
Sciences, 6(4): 1624 1632.

Seino RA, Manjeli Y and Dongmo TI. 2012b.
Cytogenetic studies in Dictyophorus griseus (Reiche &
Faiemaire, 1849)(Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae) from
Cameroon. II. Karyotype. Agriculture and Biology
Journal of North America, 3(7): 292 295.

Tepperberg JH, Moses MJ and Nath J. 1997.
Colchicine effects on meiosis in the male mouse. 1.
Meiotic prophase: synaptic arrest, univalents, loss of
damaged spermatocytes and a possible checkpoint at
Pachytene. Chromosoma, 106(3): 183 192.

Verma PS and Agarwal VK. 2005. Cell Biology,
Molecular Biology, Evolution and Ecology. Chand &
Company Ltd. Ram Nagar, New Delhi 110 055.

White MJD. 1973. Animal cytology and Evolution. 3
rd

edition. Cambridge University Press. 961.

William GO and Ogunbiyi BI. 1995. Chromosome
morphology and meiosis in Zonocerus variegatus L.
(Orthoptera, Pyrgomorphidae). Cytologia, 60(2):111-
116.

YAO Shi-hong XIE Ai-lin and XU Ping-li. 2004.
A comparative study on the karyotypes and c-banding of
seven Atractomorpha species in Guizhou. Journal of
Guizhou Normal University (Natural Science) 2004 - 2.
Seino et al., 2014

Advantages
Affordable Charges
Quick processing
Extensive indexing


Article Citation:
Manickam Raja, Rajendiran Ramkumar and Pachiappan Perumal.
Diversity, distribution, threats and conservation action of fish fauna in Chinnar
Reservoir, Tamil Nadu.
J
o
u
r
n
a
l

o
f

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
n

B
i
o
l
o
g
y

Diversity, distribution, threats and conservation action of fish fauna in
Chinnar Reservoir, Tamil Nadu
Keywords:
Chinnar reservoir, Eastern Ghats, biodiversity status, sand mining, threats.
ABSTRACT:

The freshwater fish fauna of the Chinnar reservoir/Chinnar River a tributary
of the Cauvery River system in the Tamil Nadu at the Eastern part of Ghats was
studied. A total of thirty two (32) species of freshwater fish belonging to seven (7)
orders, ten (10) families and twenty four (24) genera were recorded. Out of the 32
species, the present study recorded the presence of three (3) threatened, one (1)
vulnerable and twenty eight (28) least concerned species. The highest species diversity
was recorded in Chinnar Reservoir (n=22) and lowest diversity was found in the
Gujjarahalli (n=9). The fish fauna of the Chinnar reservoir is threatened due to
anthropogenic activities such as deforestation leading to siltation, sand mining, over
fishing by using dynamite, organic and inorganic pollution. Hence, there is an urgent
need to develop and implement conservation plans that are needed.
1317-1327 | JRB | 2014 | Vol 4 | No 3
An International
Authors:
Manickam Raja,
Rajendiran Ramkumar
and Pachiappan Perumal.

Institution:
1. Department of
Biotechnology, Periyar
University, Periyar Palkalai
Nagar, Salem- 636 011
Tamil Nadu, India.

Manickam Raja.

Email Id:

Web Address:
Dates:
Received: 11 Mar 2014 Accepted: 22 Mar 2014 Published: 06 Jun 2014
Original Research

INTRODUCTION
The ichthyofauna of Eastern Ghats have not been
thoroughly studied as that of the Western Ghats. Rema
Devi and Indra (2003) have listed 127 fish species from
Eastern Ghats based on their extensive collections and
the earlier reports beginning with Day (1878). The
Eastern Ghats are a series of broken and weathered relict
embodies as a series of isolated hills in the peninsular
plateau (Mani 1974). Krishnagiri and Dharmapuri parts
of the Eastern Ghats are the discontinuous patches of
hills with fragmented dry deciduous forest types by
which small streams originate. The region is mostly
covered with agricultural lands (66.5%), the dry
deciduous and dry deciduous scrub forests constitute
about 6.8%. Evergreen and semi-evergreen forests forms
about 0.3% (NRSA, 2007).
The reservoirs and lakes were the main assets
exploited due to inland fisheries. The understanding of
fish faunal diversity is a foremost feature for the
exploitation of freshwater reservoirs (Battul et al., 2007).
The detailed information of fishery resources, their
availability and distribution in a particular water body is
essential for proper consumption of its fishery resource
(Pawar et al., 2007). The spatial and temporal patterns of
diversity, distribution and species composition will be
useful to study the factors influencing the fish
community structure (Galacatos et al., 2004). Many fish
species have become highly endangered by human
engrossment in the riverine ecosystems as a result of
habitat loss (Lima-Junior et al., 2006; Mas-Marti et al.,
2010). Freshwater fishes are one of the most threatened
taxonomic groups (Darwall and Vie, 2005) because of
their high sensitivity to the alteration of aquatic habits
(Laffaille et al., 2005; Sarkar et al., 2008; Kang et al.,
2009).
Ichthyofauna diversity on different river systems
of India have been surveyed by Jayaram et al., (1982),
Talwar and Jhingran (1991), Menon (1992) and
contemporary works include those of Rema Devi (1992),
Rema Devi et al., (1999), Easa and Shaji (1997), Rema
Devi and Raghu Nathan (1999), Arunachalam and
Sankaranarayanan (1999), Rema Devi and Indra (2000),
Arunachalam and Muralidharan (2007, 2008 and 2009),
Arunachalam et al., (2006, 2013, and 2014), Raja et al.,
(2014). So far, very little scientific studies have been
carried out on the reservoirs of Tamil Nadu.
The Chinnar River takes its origin from a
wetland system called Thali Lake or Thali Big Tank.
Sanathkumar River, the name at its origin from Thali
Lake and the adjoining streams waters from fragmented
hilly terrain were regulated with several Anicut/check
dams, confluences with Chinnar River and regulated as
Chinnar Reservoir. The Chinnar Reservoir (Panjapalli
Dam) is located (1229'29"N 7755'26"E) in Panjapalli-
village of Dharmapuri District, Tamil Nadu. The
reservoir formed by the dam is a lake of 420 acres
impounding 500 mile cubic feet of water at its maximum
level. The reservoir comprises of an earthen dam of 365
m length across river Chinnar. The irrigation network
consists of one main canal, two distributaries and twelve
direct sluices. The reservoir provides irrigation for
1600.63 ha of land under the old and new commands in
Palacode and Karimangalam Taluks of Dharmapuri
District apart from services by means of groundwater
recharge, nutrient supply, water purification, recreation
and habitats for various biota. The Chinnar river
confluences with Cauvery river at Hogenakkal, which is
situated at 61Km from Chinnar reservoir.
Chinnar reservoir is one of the important
reservoirs in northern part of Tamil Nadu that need
serious attention in its management and conservation of
fishery resources. Detailed studies on fish fauna of this
reservoir are still lacking. To fill this gap, the present
study was carried out in order to examine the diversity,
distribution, threats and conservation plan for fish fauna
in the different spreads of Chinnar reservoir.

Raja et al., 2014
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The fish survey and collections were done
covering in 12 sites upstream/downstream of Chinnar
reservoir in Dharmapuri District, Tamil Nadu (Fig. 1)
viz; Chinnar Reservoir (S1), Panjapalli (S2), Periyanoor
(S3), Samanur (S4), Marandahalli (S5), Upparahalli (S6),
Chikkapavalli (S7), Sukkanahalli (S8), Nallur (S9),
Ganganahalli (S10), Chikkamarandahalli (S11) and
Gujjarahalli (S12). Fish were collected with the help of
gill nets, cast nets and drag nets during January-
December, 2013. The sampling was made in 100-200 m
stretches of each site. Local fisherman was involved in
netting and collection. The specimens were lively
photographed with Canon 1100 Digital SLR camera and
representative specimens of each species were fixed in
7% formalin and preserved in 70% alcohol for voucher
collection. The collected specimens were transported to
the Department of Biotechnology Cum Laboratory
museum of the Periyar University Museum of Natural
History (PUMNH- a newly started one in the year 2013),
Salem, Tamil Nadu, India and assigned the specimen
catalogue numbers (Accession number PUMNH 71-102.
The species identification was carried out using Talwar
and Jhingran, (1991); Jayaram, (2010) and nomenclatural
names were followed by the catalogue of fishes of the
California academy of sciences (Eschmeyer and Fricke,
2011; Pethiyagoda et al., 2012) and fish status was
checked in IUCN red list (IUCN, 2013).

Raja et al., 2014
Figure 1. Showing the locations/ study sites of upstream/downstream
areas of Chinnar Reservoir, Tamil Nadu.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The details of fish species recorded from the
present study sites are given in Tables 1 & 2. The
Chinnar reservoir preserves a rich variety of fish species,
on the basis of studies conducted so far, as it harbour
thirty two (32) species of fish species (Fig.2); belonging
to seven (7) orders, ten (10) families and twenty four
(24) genera. Among those only one species of
Osteoglossiformes- Notopterus notopterus was recorded.
Cypriniformes dominates the catch list with seventeen
(17) species belonging to twelve (12) genera also, five
(5) species of Siluriformes belonging to two (2) families
and four (4) genera were seen. One species of
Mu g i l i f o r me s , Cyp r i n o d o n t i f o r me s a n d
Synbranchiformes such as Xenentodon cancila,
Aplocheilus lineatus and Mastacembelus armatus and six
(6) species of Perciformes belonging to three (3) families
and four (4) genera are identified.
In the upstream/ downstream of Chinnar
reservoir the presence of highest species diversity
(Fig. 3) was recorded in Chinnar reservoir (S1; n=22),
followed by the Panjapalli (S2; n=18). The lowest
species diversity was recorded in the Gujjarahalli (S12;
n=9) and Nallur (S9; n= 10). The present survey records
Raja et al., 2014
Figure 2. Showing the some of the fish species collected from
Chinnar Reservoir.
the presence of three (3) economically important as well
as near threatened species, Mystus armatus, Ompok
bimaculatus, Oreochromis mossambicus; one (1)
vulnerable species Cyprinus carpio and twenty eight
(28) species are in least concerned categories. According
to IUCN 'Red list 2013' 3% of the species are in
vulnerable state, 9% are near threatened and 88% are
least concerned in Chinnar reservoir (Fig. 4).
The fish species such as Devario aequipinnatus,
Rasbora cauverii, Dawkinsia filamentosa, Puntius chola,
Puntius dorsalis, Pethia ticto, Pethia conchonius,
Aplocheilus lineatus having the prominent ornamental
value due to small size and bright colours can be used as
aquarium fishes. The economically important and high
commercial valued fish species such as Notopterus
notopterus, Gibelion catla, Labeo calbasu, Labeo rohita,
Ompok bimaculatus, Clarias batrachus, Heteropneustes
fossilis, Mastacembelus armatus, Channa marulius, and
Channa punctata were also found in much abundance.
Whereas, only one species of hill adapted fish species,
Garra mullya was recorded.
The fish fauna of Chinnar River is under threat as
a result of several anthropogenic interferences;
deforestation leading to siltation, inorganic pollution of
the river, dynamite fishing, and recreational activities are
common in most of the stretches of the river. The
evidence collected from the local people and local
fisherman shown high decline in the fish population in
previous decade due to dynamite fishing by nearby black
granite quarry mining workers and excessive in stream
sand-and-gravel mining of the river belt.
The scientific studies on the environmental
impact of mining were carried out at different forest
regions (Ram Prasad, 1992). During October 10, 2009
the High court of Madras, appointed Professor
M. Arunachalam as an Expert-Commissioner to provide
an assessment of sand/gravel mining impact on Chinnar
Raja et al., 2014
Figure 3. Species diversity within the study sites of Chinnar Reservoir, Tamil Nadu.
Figure 4. Conservation status of fish species collected
from different study sites of Chinnar Reservoir,
Tamil Nadu.

Raja et al., 2014
T
a
b
l
e

1

L
i
s
t

o
f

f
i
s
h

s
p
e
c
i
e
s

i
n

C
h
i
n
n
a
r

R
e
s
e
r
v
o
i
r
,

T
a
m
i
l

N
a
d
u
.

S
l
.

N
o

L
i
s
t

o
f

F
i
s
h
e
s

O
r
d
e
r

F
a
m
i
l
y

V
e
r
n
a
c
u
l
a
r

n
a
m
e

C
o
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
u
s
-

(
I
U
C
N

2
0
1
3
)

1

N
o
t
o
p
t
e
r
u
s

n
o
t
o
p
t
e
r
u
s

O
s
t
e
o
g
l
o
s
s
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

N
o
t
o
p
t
e
r
i
d
a
e

C
h
o
t
t
a
v
a
l
a
i
,

C
h
a
p
p
a
t
h
i
,

C
h
e
n
n
a
v
a
l
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2

S
a
l
m
o
p
h
a
s
i
a

b
a
c
a
i
l
a

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

V
a
l
a
c
h
e
l
,

V
e
l
l
a
c
h
i
-

k
e
n
d
a

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

3

S
a
l
m
o
p
h
a
s
i
a

b
o
o
p
i
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

S
a
m
p
a
j

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

4

B
a
r
i
l
i
u
s

g
a
t
e
n
s
i
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

A
r
t
c
a
n
d
e
e

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

5

B
a
r
i
l
i
u
s

b
e
n
d
e
l
i
s
i
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

V
e
n
n
a
t
h
i
-

k
e
n
d
a
i
,

A
k
k
i
l
i

v
a
r
a
t
a
n
k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

6

D
e
v
a
r
i
o

a
e
q
u
i
p
i
n
n
a
t
u
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

V
a
n
n
a
t
h
i
p
o
d
i
,

S
e
l
a
i
p
a
r
a
v
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

7

R
a
s
b
o
r
a

c
a
u
v
e
r
i
i

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

P
a
t
t
a
k
u
n
j
u
,

B
h
a
v
a
n
i

k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

8

A
m
b
l
y
p
h
a
r
y
n
g
o
d
o
n

m
e
l
e
t
t
i
n
u
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

P
a
c
h
a
t
h
a
l
a
i

k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

9

C
y
p
r
i
n
u
s

c
a
r
p
i
o

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

C
a
r
p

V
u
l
n
e
r
a
b
l
e

1
0

D
a
w
k
i
n
s
i
a

f
i
l
a
m
e
n
t
o
s
a

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

C
h
a
v
a
l
l
e
,

M
o
c
h
a
-

k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
1

P
u
n
t
i
u
s

c
h
o
l
a

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

P
u
t
t
i
-

k
e
n
d
a
i
,

K
a
r
o
o
n

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
2

P
u
n
t
i
u
s

d
o
r
s
a
l
i
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

S
a
l
l
-

k
e
n
d
a
i
,

P
a
l
p
o
o
r
a
n
,

M
o
o
k
a
n
a
m
-

k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
3

P
e
t
h
i
a

t
i
c
t
o

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

P
u
l
l
i

k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
4

P
e
t
h
i
a

c
o
n
c
h
o
n
i
u
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

V
a
l
l
i

k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
5

G
i
b
e
l
i
o
n

c
a
t
l
a

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

K
a
t
l
a
,
T
h
o
p
p
a

m
e
e
n
,

K
o
o
r
a

k
e
n
d
a
i
,

K
a
r
a
v
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
6

L
a
b
e
o

c
a
l
b
a
s
u

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

K
a
k
k
a
m
e
e
n
,

K
a
r
u
p
p
u
s
e
l
,

K
a
r
u
n
c
h
e
l
,

K
u
r
r
i
m
e
n
u

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
7

L
a
b
e
o

r
o
h
i
t
a

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

K
e
n
n
a
d
i
-

k
e
n
d
a
i
,

R
o
h
u

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
8

G
a
r
r
a

m
u
l
l
y
a

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
i
d
a
e

K
a
l
l
u

k
o
r
a
v
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

1
9

M
y
s
t
u
s

a
r
m
a
t
u
s

S
i
l
u
r
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

B
a
g
r
i
d
a
e

S
o
n
a
n
n
g

k
e
l
e
t
e
e

N
e
a
r

T
h
r
e
a
t
e
n
e
d

2
0

M
y
s
t
u
s

c
a
v
a
s
i
u
s

S
i
l
u
r
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

B
a
g
r
i
d
a
e

N
a
i
k
e
l
u
t
h
i
,

V
e
l
l
a
k
e
l
e
t
e

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
1

O
m
p
o
k

b
i
m
a
c
u
l
a
t
u
s

S
i
l
u
r
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

B
a
g
r
i
d
a
e

S
a
v
a
l
l
a
i
,

S
i
l
a
i
v
a
l
a
i

N
e
a
r

T
h
r
e
a
t
e
n
e
d

2
2

C
l
a
r
i
a
s

b
a
t
r
a
c
h
u
s

S
i
l
u
r
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
l
a
r
i
i
d
a
e

T
h
a
l
-

m
e
e
n
,

T
h
a
l
-

k
e
n
d
a
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
3

H
e
t
e
r
o
p
n
e
u
s
t
e
s

f
o
s
s
i
l
i
s

S
i
l
u
r
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
l
a
r
i
i
d
a
e

T
h
a
y
l
e
e
/

T
h
a
i
l
i
m
e
e
n

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
4

X
e
n
e
n
t
o
d
o
n

c
a
n
c
i
l
a

M
u
g
i
l
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

B
e
l
o
n
i
d
a
e

K
o
k
k
u
m
e
e
n
,

V
e
l
l
a
i

m
o
o
r
a
l

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
5

A
p
l
o
c
h
e
i
l
u
s

l
i
n
e
a
t
u
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
o
d
o
n
t
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
y
p
r
i
n
o
d
o
n
t
i
d
a
e

M
u
n
d
a
k
a
n
n
i
,

M
a
n
a
n
k
a
n
n
i
,

V
a
n
a
m
p
a
r
t
h
a

m
e
e
n

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
6

M
a
s
t
a
c
e
m
b
e
l
u
s

a
r
m
a
t
u
s

S
y
n
b
r
a
n
c
h
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

M
a
s
t
a
c
e
m
b
e
l
i
d
a
e

A
a
r
r
a
h

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
7

P
a
r
a
m
b
a
s
s
i
s

r
a
n
g
a

P
e
r
c
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
e
n
t
r
o
p
o
m
i
d
a
e

K
a
n
n
a
d
i

m
e
e
n

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
8

E
t
r
o
p
l
u
s

m
a
c
u
l
a
t
u
s

P
e
r
c
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
i
c
h
l
i
d
a
e

S
e
t
h
a

k
e
n
d
a
i
,

B
o
m
m
i

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

2
9

E
t
r
o
p
l
u
s

s
u
r
a
t
e
n
s
i
s

P
e
r
c
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
i
c
h
l
i
d
a
e

S
e
l
l
a
-

k
a
s
u
,

P
u
r
a
d
i
,

S
e
l
l
a
d
a
i

m
e
e
n

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

3
0

O
r
e
o
c
h
r
o
m
i
s

m
o
s
s
a
m
b
i
c
u
s

P
e
r
c
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
i
c
h
l
i
d
a
e

T
i
l
a
p
i
a
,

J
i
l
a
b
i
-
m
e
e
n

N
e
a
r

T
h
r
e
a
t
e
n
e
d

3
1

C
h
a
n
n
a

m
a
r
u
l
i
u
s

P
e
r
c
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
h
a
n
n
i
d
a
e

A
v
i
r
i
-
P
u
v
e
r
a
l
,

I
r
u

v
r
a
a
l

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

3
2

C
h
a
n
n
a

p
u
n
c
t
a
t
a

P
e
r
c
i
f
o
r
m
e
s

C
h
a
n
n
i
d
a
e

K
o
r
a
v
a

L
e
a
s
t

C
o
n
c
e
r
n

Raja et al., 2014
T
a
b
l
e

2
.

F
i
s
h

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

u
p
s
t
r
e
a
m
/
d
o
w
n
s
t
r
e
a
m

a
r
e
a
s

o
f

C
h
i
n
n
a
r

R
e
s
e
r
v
o
i
r
,

T
a
m
i
l

N
a
d
u
.

(

=

P
r
e
s
e
n
t
;

=

A
b
s
e
n
t
)

S
l
.
N
o
.

L
i
s
t

o
f

F
i
s
h
e
s

S
1

S
2

S
3

S
4

S
5

S
6

S
7

S
8

S
9

S
1
0

S
1
1

S
1
2

1

N
o
t
o
p
t
e
r
u
s

n
o
t
o
p
t
e
r
u
s

(
P
a
l
l
a
s
,

1
7
6
9
)

+

-

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

-

-

2

S
a
l
m
o
p
h
a
s
i
a

b
a
c
a
i
l
a

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

+

-

+

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

3

S
a
l
m
o
p
h
a
s
i
a

b
o
o
p
i
s

(
F
.
D
a
y
,

1
8
7
4
)

+

+

-

-

-

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

4

B
a
r
i
l
i
u
s

g
a
t
e
n
s
i
s

(
V
a
l
e
n
c
i
e
n
n
e
s
,

1
8
4
4
)

+

+

+

-

+

+

-

-

+

+

+

+

5

B
a
r
i
l
i
u
s

b
e
n
d
e
l
i
s
i
s

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
0
7
)

+

-

+

-

-

-

+

+

-

+

-

+

6

D
e
v
a
r
i
o

a
e
q
u
i
p
i
n
n
a
t
u
s

(
M
c
C
l
e
l
l
a
n
d
,
1
8
3
9
)

-

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

-

7

R
a
s
b
o
r
a

c
a
u
v
e
r
i
i

(
J
e
r
d
o
n
,

1
8
4
9
)

-

+

-

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

-

8

A
m
b
l
y
p
h
a
r
y
n
g
o
d
o
n

m
e
l
e
t
t
i
n
u
s

(
V
a
l
e
n
c
i
e
n
n
e
s
,

1
8
4
4
)

+

-

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

9

C
y
p
r
i
n
u
s

c
a
r
p
i
o

L
i
n
n
a
e
u
s
,

1
7
5
8

+

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

1
0

D
a
w
k
i
n
s
i
a

f
i
l
a
m
e
n
t
o
s
a

(
V
a
l
e
n
c
i
e
n
n
e
s
,

1
8
4
4
)

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

-

+

-

1
1

P
u
n
t
i
u
s

c
h
o
l
a

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

-

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

+

1
2

P
u
n
t
i
u
s

d
o
r
s
a
l
i
s

(
J
e
r
d
o
n
,

1
8
4
9
)

-

+

-

-

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

+

1
3

P
e
t
h
i
a

t
i
c
t
o

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

+

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

+

1
4

P
e
t
h
i
a

c
o
n
c
h
o
n
i
u
s

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

+

+

+

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

1
5

G
i
b
e
l
i
o
n

c
a
t
l
a

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

+

+

-

-

-

-

+

-

-

-

-

-
-

1
6

L
a
b
e
o

c
a
l
b
a
s
u

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

1
7

L
a
b
e
o

r
o
h
i
t
a

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

+

+

+

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

-

+

1
8

G
a
r
r
a

m
u
l
l
y
a

(
S
y
k
e
s
,

1
8
3
9
)

-

+

-

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

1
9

M
y
s
t
u
s

a
r
m
a
t
u
s

(
D
a
y
,

1
8
6
5
)

+

-

-

-

+

-

+

-

-

-

+

-

2
0

M
y
s
t
u
s

c
a
v
a
s
i
u
s

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

+

-

2
1

O
m
p
o
k

b
i
m
a
c
u
l
a
t
u
s

(
B
l
o
c
h
,

1
7
9
4
)

+

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

-

-

2
2

C
l
a
r
i
a
s

b
a
t
r
a
c
h
u
s

(
L
i
n
n
a
e
u
s
,

1
7
5
8
)

+

+

-

+

-

-

-

+

-

+

-

-

2
3

H
e
t
e
r
o
p
n
e
u
s
t
e
s

f
o
s
s
i
l
i
s

(
B
l
o
c
h
,

1
7
9
4
)

+

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

-

-

2
4

X
e
n
e
n
t
o
d
o
n

c
a
n
c
i
l
a

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

-

-

+

-

-

-

+

-

+

-

+

-

2
5

A
p
l
o
c
h
e
i
l
u
s

l
i
n
e
a
t
u
s

(
V
a
l
e
n
c
i
e
n
n
e
s
,

1
8
4
6
)

+

-

+

-

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

2
6

M
a
s
t
a
c
e
m
b
e
l
u
s

a
r
m
a
t
u
s

(
L
a
c
e
p
e
d
e
,

1
8
0
0
)

-

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

+

-

-

2
7

P
a
r
a
m
b
a
s
s
i
s

r
a
n
g
a

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

-

-

+

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

-

2
8

E
t
r
o
p
l
u
s

m
a
c
u
l
a
t
u
s

(
B
l
o
c
h
,

1
7
9
5
)

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

2
9

E
t
r
o
p
l
u
s

s
u
r
a
t
e
n
s
i
s

(
B
l
o
c
h
,

1
7
9
0
)

+

-

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

+

-

3
0

O
r
e
o
c
h
r
o
m
i
s

m
o
s
s
a
m
b
i
c
u
s

(
W
.
K
.
H

P
e
t
e
r
s
,

1
8
5
2
)

+

-

-

-

+

+

-

-

+

-

-

-

3
1

C
h
a
n
n
a

m
a
r
u
l
i
u
s

(
F
.
H
a
m
i
l
t
o
n
,

1
8
2
2
)

-

+

-

-

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

3
2

C
h
a
n
n
a

p
u
n
c
t
a
t
a

(
B
l
o
c
h
,

1
7
9
3
)

+

-

-

-

+

+

+

-

-

-

-

-

river ecosystem and the land use pattern along the
stretches of river below the reservoir. His report
concluded that, the river system under assessment needs
at least five years to restore and hence sand/gravel
mining should not be carried out for the next five years
(Arunachalam, 2009).
Instream sand mining resulted in the habitat loss
and channel morphology alteration leads to dreadful
conditions of aquatic biota; this continued mining cause
the entire stream to excavation (Kondolf et al., 2002) and
negative effects on aquatic life (Johnes and OSullivan,
1989). An increase in the amount of fine sediments
increase the amount of sediment-associated nutrients
(especially phosphorus) and contaminants in the river
water. This increases the amount of water quality
degradation caused by excessive nutrients with the
resulting negative impacts to aquatic life (Owens and
Walling, 2002; Correll, 1998). Ecosystem integrity also
embodies the degree of self-organization (Muller et al.,
2000). Once the systems reliability is troubled by human
actions, the natural patterns of species structure and
associated ecological processes (e.g. food web dynamics)
are likely to be replaced by others that may not provide
the means for enduring species existence (Chellappa
et al., 2003). In India the protection of aquatic
biodiversity is ineffective due to the lake of scientific
data and conservation plans.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Interaction with the local fishermen and Inland
fisheries department regarding the abundance of fish
diversity in the Chinnar reservoir resulted the
overexploitation plays a major role to eradicate the fish
species. The majority of the fish catch is during monsoon
season. Only, nets with large size gill nets are allowed in
the rainy season, which are useful to catch the exotic
species. Culturing techniques for endangered/threatened
species should be developed to protect the endangered/
threatened species by taking critical steps to conserve the
genetic diversity. The removal of the exotic species,
Oreochromis mossambicus is advantageous to reservoir
fishery. The presence of tilapia decreases the population
of other fish species. Thus, it is beneficial to remove this
population by selective fishing. In view of the existing
practices there is an urgent need to take up certain
conservation approach to control the drastic drop down
in fish population and to save the vulnerable, threatened
species from wiping out of the region. Though, there are
certain legal restrictions in few areas, but it remained un-
productive due to lack of uniformity in its
implementation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The corresponding author is grateful to SERB-
DST (Government of India) - Start up Research Grant for
Young Investigators (vide File No. DST No. SB/YS/LS-
36/2013) and also thank Mr. S. Mariappan for line
drawing.

REFERENCES
Arunachalam M and Muralidharan M. 2007. New
record of Batasio sharavatiensis Bhatt and Jayaram from
Tunga river, Karnataka. Zoos Print. 22 (5): 2680-2682.

Arunachalam M and Muralidharan M. 2009.
Nemacheilus stigmofasciatus, a new species of
nemacheiline loach (Cypriniformes: Balitoridae) from
the Western Ghats, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa. 1
(3): 147-150.

Arunachalam M and Sankaranarayanan A. 1999.
Fishes of Gadana river in Kalakkad Mundanthurai tiger
reserve. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society.
96: 232-238.

Arunachalam M, Muralidharan M, Murugan M and
Soranam R. 2006. Diversity and Distributional pattern
of cypriniformes in streams and rivers of Western Ghats.
Abstracted In: Symposium on Biology of Cypriniformes,
Raja et al., 2014
12-15 October, 2006, Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, P. R .China.

Arunachalam M, Raja M, Malaiammal P and
Richard LM. 2014. New species of Aborichthys
(Cypriniformes: Balitoridae) from Arunachal Pradesh,
India, Species. 7(18): 33-47.

Arunachalam M, Raja M, Mayden RL and Chandran
A. 2013. Olyra astrifera a new species of Olyrid catfish
from the Western Ghats, Southern India (Teleosti:
Bagridae: Olyrininae) and the designation of Neotype,
Olyra longicaudata McClelland, 1842 from north-eastern
India. International Journal of Zoology and Research.
3(2): 51-60.

Arunachalam M, Raja M, Nandagopal S,
Vijayakumar C, Malaiammal P and Showket AB.
2014. Range extension of endangered earthworm eel
Pillaia indica Yazdani, 1972 (Synbranchiformes:
Chaudhuriidae) from West Bengal, India. Research and
Reviews. Journal of Ecology and Environmental
Sciences. 2 (1): 5-8.

Arunachalam M. 2009. Assessment of Chinnar River
and the alleged damage to agricultural lands by sand
mining, Report submitted to the High court of Madras:
45p.

Arunachalam M and Muralidharan M. 2008.
Description of a new species of the genus Psilorhynchus
(Teleostei: Psilorhynchidae) from a Western Ghat stream
in Southern India. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology. 56 (2):
405-414.

Arunachalam M, Raja M, Nandagopal S and Mayden
RL. 2013. Garra palaruvica, A new cyprinid fish
(Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae) from Kerala, Western
Ghats, Peninsular India, International Journal of Zoology
Research. 3 (1): 62-68.

Battul PN, Rao KR, Navale RA, Bagale MB and Shah
NV. 2007. Fish diversity from Ekrukh Lake near
Solapur, Maharashtra. Journal of Aquatic Biology. 22(2):
68-72.

Chellappa S, Camara MR, Chellappa NT, Beveridge
MCM and Huntingford FA. 2003. Reproductive
ecology of a neotropical cichlid fish, Cichla monoculus
(Osteichthyes: Cichlidae). Brazilian Journal of Biology.
63 (1): 17-26.

Correll DL. 1998. The role of phosphorus in the
eutrophication of receiving waters: a review. Journal of
Environmental Quality. 27 (2): 261-266.

Darwall WRT and Vie JC. 2005. Identifying important
sites for conservation of freshwater biodiversity:
extending the species based approach. Fish Management
Ecology. 12 (5): 287-293.

Day F. 1878. The fishes of India: being a natural history
of the fishes known to inhabit the seas and freshwaters of
India, Burma and Ceylon. Text and atlas in 2 parts.
London. Indian Reprint by Jagmander Book Agency,
New Delhi. XX+ 778 p. 195 plates

Easa PS and Shaji CP. 1997. Freshwater fish diversity
in Kerala part of Nilgiri Biosphere reserve. Current
science. 73 (2): 180-182.

Eschmeyer WN and R Fricke. 2011. Catalog of fishes
electronic version (20 December, 2013). Electronic
database accessible at http://research.calacademy.org /
research/ichthyology/catalog/ fishcatmain.asp/.

Galacatos K, Barriga-Salazar R and Stewart DJ.
2004. Seasonal and habitat influences on fish
communities within the lower Yasuni River basin of the
Ecuadorian Amazon, Environmental Biology of Fishes.
71 (1): 33-51.

IUCN. 2013. List of Threatened Species. Version
2013.3. Electronic database accessible at http://
Raja et al., 2014
www.iucnredlist.org/. Captured on 20 December 2013.

Jayaram KC, Venkateshwaralu T and Ragunathan
MB. 1982. A survey of the Cauvery river system with a
major account of its fish fauna. Records of the
Zoological Survey of India, Occasional Paper 36, 115 p.

Jayaram KC. 2010. The freshwater fishes of the Indian
Region. Narendra Publishing House, New Delhi, India.
616.

Johnes PJ and OSullivan PE. 1989. Nitrogen and
phosphorus losses from the catchment of Slapton Ley,
Devon- an export coefficient approach, Field Studies.
7 (2): 285-309.

Kang B, He D, Perrett L, Wang H, Hu W, Deng W
and Wu Y. 2009. Fish and fisheries in the Upper
Mekong: current assessment of the fish community,
threats and conservation. Reviews in Fish Biology and
Fisheries. 19(4): 465-480.

Kondolf GM, Smeltzer M and Kimball L. 2002.
Freshwater gravel mining and dredging issues. Prepared
for Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Washington Department of Ecology, Washington
Department of Transportation. 122.

Laffaille P, Acou A, Guillouet J and Legault A. 2005.
Temporal changes in European eel, Anguilla anguilla,
stocks in a small catchment after installation of fish
passes. Fish Management Ecology. 12 (2): 123-129.

Lima-Junior SE, Cardone IB and Goitein R. 2006.
Fish assemblage structure and aquatic pollution in a
Brazilian stream: some limitations of diversity indices
and models for environmental impact studies. Ecology of
Freshwater Fish. 15 (3): 284-290.

Mani MS. 1974. Ecology and biogeography in India.
The Hague: Dr. W. Junk Publishers. 772.

Mas-Marti E, Garcia Berthou E, Sabater S,
Tomanova S and Munoz I. 2010. Comparing fish
assemblages and trophic ecology of permanent and
intermittent reaches in a Mediterranean stream.
Hydrobiologia. 657(1): 167-180.

Menon AGK. 1992. Taxonomy of the mahseer fishes of
the genus Tor Gray with description of new species from
the Deccan. Journal of the Bombay Natural History
Society. 89 (2): 210- 228.

Muller F, Hoffmann-Kroll R and Wiggering H. 2000.
Indicating ecosystem integrity - theoretical concepts and
environmental requirements. Ecological Modelling. 130
(1-3): 13-23.

National Remote Sensing Agency. 2007. Biodiversity
characterization at landscape level in Eastern Ghats and
east coast using Satellite Remote Sensing and
Geographic Information System. NRSA, Govt. of India,
Hyderabad. 310p.

Owens PN and Walling DE. 2002. The phosphorus
content of fluvial sediment in rural and industrialized
river basins. Water Research. 36 (3): 685-701.

Pawar SK, Mane AM and Pulle JS. 2007. The fish
fauna of Pethwadas Dam Taluka Kandhar in Nanded
District, Maharashtra, India. Journal of Aquatic Biology.
22(2): 55-58.

Pethiyagoda R, Meegaskumbura M and Maduwage
K. 2012. A synopsis of the South Asian fishes referred to
Puntius (Pisces: Cyprinidae). Ichthyological Explorations
of Freshwaters. 23(1): 6995.

Raja M, Kavitha M, Ramkumar R, Anandhi M and
Perumal P. 2014. Ichthyological survey of the checklist
of fauna in Stanley Reservoir, Tamil Nadu, South India-
Diversity, Distribution, Threats and Conservation action.
Discovery life. 6(16): 21-30.

Raja et al., 2014
Ram Prasad. 1992. Ecological reclamation of Mines
areas in Madhya Pradesh. Vacham. 3(2): 45-46.

Rema Devi K and Indra TJ. 2003. An updated
checklist of Ichthyofauna of Eastern Ghats, Zoos Print.
18 (4): 1067-1070.

Rema Devi K and Indra TJ. 2000. Freshwater
Ichthyofaunal resources of Tamil Nadu 77 97 pp. In:
Ponniah, A. G. and Gopalakrishnan. A. (Eds.). Endemic
Fish Diversity of Western Ghats. NBFGR NATP
Publication-1, National Bureau of Fish Genetic
Resources, Lucknow, U.P., India. 347.

Rema Devi K and Raghunathan MB. 1999. Report on
the Ichthyofauna of North Arcot district, Tamil nadu,
Records of Zoological Survey of India. 97 (1): 163-177.

Rema Devi K, Indra T, Raghunathan MB, Bai M and
Ravichandran MS. 1999. Ichthyofauna of
Tambraparani river system of Tamil Nadu. Zoos Print.
12 (7): 1-2.

Rema Devi K. 1992. On a small collection of fish from
Javadi Hills, North Arcot District, Tamil Nadu, Records
of Zoological Survey of India. 91 (3-4): 353-360.

Sarkar UK, Pathak AK and Lakra WS. 2008.
Conservation of freshwater fish resources of India: new
approaches, assessment and challenges. Biodiversity
Conservation. 17 (10):2495-2511.

Talwar PK and Jhingran AG. 1991. Inland fishes of
India and adjacent countries. Vol.1, IBH Publishing,
New Delhi.
Raja et al., 2014

Advantages
Affordable Charges
Quick processing
Extensive indexing


Article Citation:
Bubesh Guptha M, Thulasaiah T and Sivaram Prasad NV.
New locality record of yellow collared wolf snake Lycodon flavicollis mukherjee and
bhupathy, 2007 from seshachalam biosphere reserve, Eastern Ghats, Andhra Pradesh, India.
J
o
u
r
n
a
l

o
f

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
n

B
i
o
l
o
g
y

New Locality Record of Yellow Collared Wolf Snake Lycodon flavicollis
Mukherjee and Bhupathy, 2007 from Seshachalam Biosphere Reserve,
Eastern Ghats, Andhra Pradesh, India
Keywords:
Seshachalam Biosphere Reserve, Lycodon flavicollis, New Locality Record,
Andhra Pradesh.
ABSTRACT:

During field survey, we encounter live specimen of Lycodon flavicollis while it
was crossing the path at about 1130 hrs on 20
th
September 2013. Near a close to the
famous temple of Sri Lord Venkateswara (13 42 N & 79 20E). During the time of
collection, it was cool and cloudy. Subsequently, the specimen was photographed and
released after collection of morphometry measurements. In the present paper, we
provide additional and new locality record in Eastern Ghats.
1328-1331 | JRB | 2014 | Vol 4 | No 3
An International
Authors:
Bubesh Guptha M
*
,
Thulasaiah T and
Sivaram Prasad NV.

Institution:
Bio - Lab of Seshachalam
Hills, Wildlife Management
Circle, Kapilatheertham,
Tirupati - 517 501,
Andhra Pradesh, India

Bubesh Guptha M.

Email Id:

Web Address:
Dates:
Received: 19 Oct 2013 Accepted: 02 Dec 2013 Published: 11 Jun 2014
Original Research
ISSN Number: Print: 2231 6280; Online: 2231- 6299

INTRODUCTION:
Amphibians and reptiles play a major role in
ecological food wed, as both predators and prey. Herpits
also provide a significant benefit to agriculture and
recreational activity as consumers of insects, rodents, and
other pest species Amphibians and reptiles, 2006).
Lycodon, one of the most widespread Asiatic snake taxa,
ranges from the Caspian Sea to the Philippines and
Indonesia. Over 25 species have been reported to date
(Smith, 1943; Biswas and Sanyal, 1965; Lanza, 1999;
Slowinski et al., 2001; Daltry and Wuster, 2002), and 11
of them occur within the Indian subcontinent (Mukherjee
and Bhupathy, 2007). The Eastern Ghats is of broken and
isolated hills of the Deccan Plateau, unlike the
continuous mountain range of Western Ghats of the
southwestern India (Chettri and Bhupathy, 2010). The
collection site of Lycodon flavicollis is located in
Seshachalam hill ranges. These hill ranges are a part of
the Eastern Ghats, spread over Chittoor and Kadapah
districts of Andhra Pradesh. The predominant vegetation
type is tropical southern dry mixed deciduous forest
(Champion and Seth, 1968). The vegetation is a mix of
the tropical southern dry mixed deciduous types and
includes three protected areas, namely Sri Venkateswara
Wildlife Sanctuary, Sri Venkateswara National Park and
Seshachalam Biosphere Reserve. This range is the
richest floristic hot spot harboring many endemic and
rare plants. The entire sanctuary is an uninhabited large
chunk of dry deciduous Red Sanders bearing forest
(Bubesh et al., 2013).

METHODOLOGY:
Totally 53 field days were spent to rapidly assess
the Herpetofauna Since August 2011 onwards, we are
Guptha et al., 2014
Source: Google Earth.
Figure 1: Distribution map for Lycodon flavicollis in India (after Mukherjee and Bhupathy 2007),
with an Yellow spot indicating the earlier record from Anaikatti Hills, Tamil Nadu, Western Ghats
and Pink spot indicating the new locality record for Seshachalam Hills, Andhra Pradesh, Eastern
Ghats.
carrying out a detailed biodiversity inventory of the
Seshachalam Biosphere Reserve in Chittoor and Kadapa
districts, Andhra Pradesh. Data collection will be carried
out by using Visual Encounter Survey Method. The
sanctuary area was different and all habitats were
randomly explored on the basis of habitat and
availability of the species. All important major and minor
water bodies, including seasonal rivulets were
extensively explored for aquatic species.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
During nature trail in Seshachalam Biosphere
Reserve we encounter live specimen of Lycodon
flavicollis dated 20
th
September 2013 at 1130 hrs. The
specimen was collected from the habitat close to the
famous temple of Sri Lord Venkateswara (1342N and
7920E) (Fig-1). Surrounding mixed vegetation forest.
During the time of collection, it was cool and cloudy.
Subsequently, the specimen was photographed and
released after collection of morphometry measurements.
All measurements are in mm (Table-1). So far very little
information is available or published about this species,
Lycodon flavicollis a new species were described
recently from Anaikatti Hills, Tamil Nadu, Western
Ghats (Mukherjee and Bhupathy 2007).
Yellow Collared Wolf Snake Lycodon
flavicollis is a species of non venomous snake, Snout
broad, much depressed, long, spatulate, with the upper
lip swollen. Uniform brownish grey above, with a yellow
collar (Figure- 2 and 3).
Threats
Management intervention should ensure
checking of illegal entry especially red sander smugglers,
livestock pressure etc. Forest fire is one of the major
threats in the Seshachalam hills.

RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend that further studies be carried out
in the Eastern Ghats and its surrounding areas at the
earliest possible opportunity to confirm the presence of
Guptha et al., 2014
Figure 2: Showing head and aspects of dorsal
coloration in Lycodon flavicollis
Figure 3: Showing aspects of head and dorsum
of Lycodon flavicollis
Table 1: Morphometry of Lycodon flavicollis from
Seshachalam Biosphere Reserve
Particulars Measurements
Ventral 217
Sub Caudal 68
Supralabials 9
Tail Length 41mm
Head Length 8mm
Head Width 5mm
Total Length 280mm

many such new species. Also everyone should realize
that the protection of habitat is an important aspect in
conservation of such species.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
We are thankful to Sri A.V. Joseph, IFS, PCCF
(WL) and CWW, Andhra Pradesh for giving permission
to carry out field studies in Seshachalam Biosphere
Reserve. Special thanks to Sri M. Ravi Kumar, IFS,
Conservator of Forests, WLM Circle, Tirupati for
encouragement and necessary helps. We also thank Sri
K. Madhu, Miss K. Rohini Anusha, Sri V. Bhavani
Shankar, Sri G. Uma Maheswar and Sri P. Prudhvi Raj
from the Bio-Lab of Seshachalam Hills who
accompanied along with the survey.

REFERENCES:
Amphibians and Reptiles. 2006. Wildlife Habitat
council. (Natural resources conservation Service),
Number, 35. www.parcplace.org.

Biswas S and Sanyal DP. 1965. A new species of Wolf
snake of the genus Lycodon Boie (Reptilia: Serpentes:
Colubridae) from the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
Proc. Zool. Soc. Calcutta, 18, 137 141.

Bubesh MG, Chalapathi Rao PV, Sivaram Prasad
NV and Madhu Babu P. 2013. New Locality Record of
Brown vine snake Ahaetulla pulverulenta (Dumeril,
Bibron & Dumeril, 1854), in Seshachalam Biosphere
Reserve, Eastern Ghats, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Universal Journal of Environmental Research and
Technology. 2(5): 456-457.

Champion HG and Seth SK. 1968. A revised survey of
the forest types of India. Govt. of India Press, Delhi.

Chettri B and Bhupathy S. 2010. Three little known
reptile species from the Araku Valley, Eastern Ghats
with notes on their distribution. Journal of Threatened
Taxa 2(8): 1109-1113.
Daltry JC and Wuster W. 2002. A new species of Wolf
Snake from the Cardamom Mountains, Southwestern
Cambodia. Herpetologica. 58(4): 498 504.

Lanza B. 1999. A new species of Lycodon from
Philippines, with a key to the genus (Reptilia: Serpentes:
Colubridae). Tropical Zool., 12: 89 104.

Mukherjee D and Bhupathy S. 2007. A New Species
Of Wolf Snake (Serpentes: Colubridae: Lycodon) From
Anaikatti Hills, Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu, India.
Russian Journal of Herpetology. 14(1): 21 26

Slowinski JB, Pawar S, Win H, Thin T, Gyi SW, Oo
SL and Tun H. 2001. A new Lycodon (Serpentes:
Colubridae) from Northeast India and Myanmar
(Burma). Proc. California Acad. Sci., 52(20): 397 405.

Smith MA. 1943. The Fauna of British India, including
Ceylon and Burma. Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. III.
Serpentes, Taylor and Francis, London.
Guptha et al., 2014

Advantages
Affordable Charges
Quick processing
Extensive indexing


Guidelines for Authors

The article should be addressed to "The Editor".

Submission of an article implies that it has never been published in any other journals and if accepted, it will not be published
elsewhere.

All papers are first reviewed by the editor. Papers found lacking will not be considered. Others will be sent for a detailed peer-review
process.

Journal Manuscript Format

The manuscript should be typed in Times new Roman font with font size 11 and 1.5 line spacing. The page size should be strictly
A4. All images should be in JPEG format. The article is to be submitted should accompany a covering letter with name and complete address
(including Telephone Number and e-mail ID) of the author/s. The completed article should be sent to submit@jresearchbiology.com

Title

The title should briefly identify the subject and indicate the purpose of the document. The title should supply enough information for
the reader to make a reliable decision on probable interest. Do not use all caps; instead use caps only at the first word of the title and/or at
scientific names, abbreviations etc., Center the authors' initials and last names directly below the title.

Abstract

The abstract should include a hypothesis or rationale for the work, a brief description of the methods, a summary of the results, and a conclusion:
The abstract should be less than 250 words. Do not include literature citations or references to tables, figures or equations.

Keywords

A short list of keywords or phrases should be included immediately after the abstract as index words. Choose keywords that reflect the
content of your article. Note that words in the title are not searchable as keywords unless they are also included in the keyword list.

Body of the Article

The introductory section of the text should include a brief statement of why the research was conducted. It should also define the
problem and present objectives along with a plan of development of the subject matter. The introductory section also usually includes a brief
survey of the relevant literature on the topic.

Materials and Methods

Provide sufficient detail so that the work may be repeated. Do not give details of methods described in readily available sources.
Instead, refer to the source and describe any modification. Figures that illustrate test apparatus and tables of treatment parameters or equipment
specifications are appropriate here.

Results and Discussion

This section describes the solution to the problem stated in the introductory section. Use figures and tables to visually supplement the
presentation of your results. The text must refer explicitly to all visuals, and you must interpret the visual elements to emphasize the evidence on
which your conclusions are based. Do not omit important negative results.
In addition, relate your findings to previous findings by identifying how and why there are differences and where there is agreement. Speculation
is encouraged, but it must be identified.

Conclusion

This is a summary of your results. In this section, state any conclusions that can be drawn from your data. You may also include
suggestions for future research. The conclusion may be a subsection of the Results and Discussion section, or it may be a separate section. Data
or statements cited in your conclusion must have been stated previously in the article. Do not introduce new information in the conclusion.

Acknowledgement

Acknowledgements are optional. Use them to thank individuals or organizations that provided assistance in materials, expertise, or
financing. The acknowledgements will appear at the end of the text and should be limited to one or two sentences.

References

All sources cited in the text must be listed in the References, and all documents listed in the References must be cited in the text.
Accuracy of citation is the author's responsibility.

Reference Style

References should be cited in the text in the form (Author et al, 1987) and listed in alphabetical order at the end of the article as follows:

Schernewski G, Neumann T. The trophic state of the Baltic Sea a century ago: a model simulation study. J Mar Sys., 2005;53:109
124.

Kaufman PD, Cseke LJ, Warber S, Duke JA and Brielman HL. Natural Products from plants. CRC press, Bocaralon, Florida. 1999;
15-16.

Kala CP. Ecology and Conservation of alphine meadows in the valley of flowers national park, Garhwal Himalaya. Ph.D Thesis,
Dehradun: Forest Research Institute, 1998; 75-76.

http://www.ethnobiomed.com/content/pdf/1746-4269-1-11.pdf.

Appendix

Use an appendix for material that is too long to include in the text of the article.

Manuscript Charges

Journal of Research in Biology is an International Research Journal. This Journal provides immediate access to all published full-text
articles to interested readers from all around the world. The availability of the authors paper makes the scientific community to understand and
develop an impact in the concerned research field. It also increases the chance of more citations of the published work, which in turn can be
translated into more recognition of research. This journal also accelerates research and knowledge building worldwide.

Publishing an article in Journal of Research in Biology requires payment of the manuscript processing charges, once the manuscript is
accepted for publication. The payment is to be made by one of the authors, their university/organization, or funding entity. The manuscript
processing charges are fixed so as to allow publishers to recover manuscript processing expenses and the cost of making the full-text available on
the Internet to all interested researchers.

For Indians

The charges for submission of a Research article is Rs 2100, up to 8 pages and for more pages, each page costs Rs 250.

For Foreign nationals

The charges for submission of a Research article is USD 100, up to 8 pages and for more pages, each page costs 15 USD.

Copyright

Authors who publish in Journal of Research in Biology retain the copyright of their work which allows the unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction of an article in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.

If you have any queries kindly contact us at contact@jresearchbiology.com

Journal of Research in Biology Volume 4 Issue 3

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Journal of Research in Biology Volume 4 Issue 3

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Aim and Scope

S-ar putea să vă placă și