AArk logo

CNA logo
Evaluaciones completadas
y recomendado
acciones de conservación
puede encontrarse en el
evaluación de Necesidades de Conservación
programa en

www.ConservationNeeds.org

El personal del Arca de los Anfibios ayuda a coordinar los programas ex situ implementados por los socios alrededor del mundo, con el primer énfasis en programas dentro del área de distribución de la especie. Siempre estamos conscientes de nuestra obligación de acoplar medidas de conservación ex situ con los esfuerzos necesarios para proteger o restaurar especies en su hábitat natural. Nuestros Coordinadores de Taxón ayudan a coordinar todos los aspectos de la implementación dentro de la iniciativa del AArk y ayudan a los socios del AArk a identificar los taxones prioritarios para trabajo de conservación in situ o ex situ. Un parte inicial de este proceso involucra evaluar las especies, para ayudar a los directores de conservación maximizar el impacto de sus limitados recursos de conservación al identificar que especies de anfibios están en mayor necesidad de particulares tipos de acciones de conservación. La conservación ex situ de una especie de anfibios amenazados es considerada una necesidad cuando lo fundamental de la conservación in situ no puede asegurar por si sola la supervivencia de una especie y su ecosistema. Cuando el manejo ex situ de una especie de anfibios es considerado necesario y apropiado, la prioridad debería ser establecer la iniciativa dentro del área de distribución del origen ecológico.

En 2006, CBSG y WAZA realizaron un taller Planificación de Conservación de Anfibios Ex Situ en Panamá, y durante ese taller, un grupo de trabajo para selección y priorización de taxón desarrolló una serie de preguntas para seleccionar y priorizar que taxones tienen mayor necesidad de ayuda ex situ. Posteriormente el árbol de decisión fue revisado y refinado, y ahora se desarrolló a la Herramienta para Evaluar las Necesidades de Conservación de Anfibios, del AArk, y una herramienta electrónica estandarizada de datos, utilizando Microsoft Excel. El proceso de evaluación ha comprobado ser un procedimiento lógico, transparente, y repetible para guiar las actividades de conservación de anfibios dentro de un país o región. Generalmente, a la comunidad de conservación ex situ le hace conocimiento específico para determinar que especies están en mayor riesgo en vida libre, y que especies necesitan rescate inmediato para evitar su extinción.

Cuando se prepara un taller de Evaluación de Necesidades de Conservación del AArk, dependemos fuertemente del Presidente del Grupo de Especialistas de Anfibios de la SSC de la UICN para armar un grupo similar de expertos al cual condujo la Evaluación Global de Anfibios, en el 2004, pero esta vez con la meta de actualizar la información y separar y evaluar todos los taxones para determinar las mejores acciones de conservación para ayudar a asegurar su supervivencia en la vida libre. La evaluación resulta en una serie de reportes para nueve acciones de conservación diferentes. Las especies son enumeradas de acuerdo a su prioridad para la particular acción de conservación, y los documentos de apoyo proporcionan una guía para aquellas especies que tienen el mayor chance de beneficiarse de las acciones de conservación establecidas.

Desde el 2007, hemos facilitado evaluaciones de las necesidades de conservación de 3,375 (46%) de las especies de anfibios en el mundo a través de 26 talleres nacionales o regionales. Talleres adicionales están planificados para otros países y regiones en los próximos meses. Un resumen de los resultados de las evaluaciones de los talleres previos están disponibles en la página de Resultados de Evaluaciones de nuestro sitio web, y las evaluaciones completas se pueden encontrar en el programa de Evaluación de Necesidades de Conservación en www.ConservationNeeds.org. A principios del 2015, el proceso de evaluación migró a un formato en línea, permitiendo un acceso más completo para los asesores, con evaluaciones simultáneas nacionales realizándose al mismo tiempo. Los beneficios de este proceso de evaluación son claros – reunimos a los expertos principales en el campo de los anfibios en cada región, para determinar colectivamente la mejor línea de acciones de conservación para ayudar a prevenir la extinción de especies de anfibios amenazadas en vida libre. Estas acciones incluyen restauración de hábitat y preservación, mitigación de amenazas, reproducción en cautiverio para liberación y concientización y participación de la comunidad. Sin una gestión inmediata en cautiverio como solución provisional de un esfuerzo integrado de conservación, cientos de especies podrían extinguirse. Porque los recursos ex situ con limitados, el Arca de los Anfibios debe tratar de identificar que especies requieren de manejo ex situ con mayor urgencia.


Conservation Needs Assessment for Bolivia, June 2-4 2014

Bolivia is a mega-diverse country holding a large percentage of the world’s biodiversity. This richness contrasts with a relatively poor understanding of its biodiversity and as in many South American countries, a lack of economical resources. Disturbingly, a number of high priority sites for amphibian conservation, even within protected areas, require immediate conservation action, and many of these areas appear to be under increasing threats from over harvesting, exotic species and habitat degradation.

Bolivian assessment workshopThe Conservation Needs Assessment for the amphibians of Bolivia brought together sixteen amphibian field biologists from around Bolivia, representing eight different museums, universities, zoos and non-governmental organizations. The three-day assessment workshop was hosted by the Museo de Historia Natural Alcide d’Orbigny in Cochabamba, Bolivia, and was facilitated by Kevin Johnson from the Amphibian Ark. During the workshop, all 265 amphibian species found in Bolivia were assessed and prioritized for the most urgent conservation actions required to ensure their ongoing survival in the wild. These 265 species include 16 that are listed in the IUCN Red List as Critically Endangered, 16 Endangered, 25 Vulnerable, 5 Near Threatened, 185 Least Concern and 18 Data Deficient. Eighty-eight of the species (33%) are endemic to Bolivia, and of these 45 species are considered to be threatened. The recommendations from the conservation needs assessment for Bolivian amphibians include:

  • 29 Rescue – species that are in imminent danger of extinction (nationally) and require ex situ management, as part of an integrated program, to ensure their survival.
  • 40 In situ conservation – species for which mitigation of threats in the wild may still bring about their successful conservation.
  • 113 In situ research – species that for one or more reasons require further in situ research to be carried out as part of the conservation action for the species. One or more critical pieces of information is not known at this time.
  • 18 Ex situ research – species currently undergoing, or proposed for specific applied research that directly contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species, in the wild (this includes clearly defined ‘model’ or ‘surrogate’ species).
  • 2 Mass production in captivity – species threatened through wild collection (e.g. as a food resource), which could be bred in captivity – normally in-country, ex situ – to replace a demand for wild harvested specimens.
  • 73 Conservation education – species that are specifically selected for management – primarily in zoos and aquariums – to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors, in order to promote positive behavioral change.
  • 29 Biobanking – species for which the long-term storage of sperm or cells to perpetuate their genetic variation is urgently recommended, due the serious threat of extinction of the species.
  • 86 No conservation action – species that do not require any conservation action at this point in time.

  Almost all of the fourteen species in the genus Telmatobius were amongst the highest priority species for a range of conservation actions, as well as a number of Hyloscirtus, Gastrotheca, Rhinella and Psychrophrynella species. Funding for this workshop was generously provided by a grant from the Chicago Board of Trade Endangered Species Fund.


Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop for the Philippines, July 1-4 2014

Philippine assessment workshop participantsIn July 2014, the University of Santo Tomas in Manila, Philippines, hosted a workshop to assess the conservation needs of all Philippine amphibians. During the workshop, 113 species of amphibians were assessed and prioritized for their conservation actions. It was evident during the assessment process that many of the Red List categories that have been assigned to local species are now quite out of date, with most not being updated since 2004. Although the group wasn’t able to complete Red List assessments during the workshop, the Red List categories used to complete this assessment were revised to their estimated values, based upon the expertise of the workshop participants. It is quite clear that Philippine amphibians are in need of a complete Red List re-assessment.

According to the estimated Red List categories, Philippine amphibians fall into the following Red List categories: Critically Endangered (1), Endangered (1), Vulnerable (21), Near Threatened (32), Least Concern (25) and Data Deficient (33). Fifteen participants representing nine different organizations in the Philippines systematically assessed the species using the AArk’s conservation needs assessment process, with each species being recommended for one or more of the following conservation actions:

  • Ex Situ Rescue: 2 species that are in imminent danger of extinction (nationally) and require ex situ management, as part of an integrated program, to ensure their survival.
  • In Situ Conservation: 35 species for which mitigation of threats in the wild may still bring about their successful conservation.
  • In Situ Research: 46 species that for one or more reasons require further in situ research to be carried out as part of the conservation action for the species. One or more critical pieces of information is not known at this time.
  • Ex Situ Research: 40 species currently undergoing, or proposed for specific applied research that directly contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species, in the wild (this includes clearly defined ‘model’ or ‘surrogate’ species).
  • Mass Production in Captivity: 1 species threatened through wild collection (e.g. as a food resource), which could be bred in captivity – normally in-country, ex situ – to replace a demand for wild harvested specimens.
  • Conservation Education: 42 species that are specifically selected for management – primarily in zoos and aquariums – to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors, in order to promote positive behavioral change.
  • Biobanking: 2 species for which the long-term storage of sperm or cells to perpetuate their genetic variation is urgently recommended, due the serious threat of extinction of the species.
  • No Conservation Action Required: 19 species that do not require any conservation action at this point in time.

  During the last day of the workshop, participants drafted the outline for a National Amphibian Action Plan for the Philippines, and allocated authors for each section of the document. This will be a detailed national action plan, and will include the priorities and recommendations produced during the workshop. It is anticipated that the action plan will be published before the end of 2014. As with other recent amphibian conservation needs assessment workshops, AArk staff are working with the local amphibian conservation community to identify a suitable person to appoint to a half-time National Amphibian Conservation Coordinator position for a period of 12 months. This person will work with participants from the assessment and other stakeholders to complete the writing and publishing of the national amphibian action plan and will then help to develop further species-level conservation action plans and to help forge new partnerships, both in-country and internationally, to ensure that recommendations from the workshop are implemented in a coordinated way. Funding is being sought to employ a suitable candidate. Experience has shown that having a person dedicated to this type of role for a period after the assessment workshop will lead to a more coordinated response, and conservation programs which have a better chance of achieving their aims. AArk staff will continue to provide support and advice as required, to ensure the best possible outcomes for the long term survival of amphibians in the wild in the Philippines. Funding for the workshop was generously provided by Chester Zoo and the University of Santo Tomas, with the University of Santo Tomas providing the workshop venue and equipment. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop for Ecuador, May 21-24 2012

In May 2012 the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Ecuador (PUCE), in Quito, Ecuador, hosted a workshop to assess the conservation needs of Ecuadorian amphibians. During the workshop, 265 of Ecuador’s 531 species of amphibians were assessed, including all 241 threatened species (Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable and Near Threatened), and 24 species categorized in the IUCN Red List as Least Concern or Data Deficient.

Participants representing eight different organizations systematically assessed the species using the AArk’s conservation needs assessment process, with each species being recommended for one or more of the following conservation actions:

  • Rescue: 55 species that are in imminent danger of extinction (nationally) and require ex situ management, as part of an integrated program, to ensure their survival.
  • In Situ Conservation: 202 species for which mitigation of threats in the wild may still bring about their successful conservation.
  • In Situ Research: 290 species that for one or more reasons require further in situ research to be carried out as part of the conservation action for the species. One or more critical pieces of information is not known at this time.
  • Ex Situ Research: 28 species currently undergoing, or proposed for specific applied research that directly contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species, in the wild (this includes clearly defined ‘model’ or ‘surrogate’ species).
  • Conservation Education: 64 species that are specifically selected for management – primarily in zoos and aquariums – to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors, in order to promote positive behavioral change.
  • Biobanking: 55 species for which the long-term storage of sperm or cells to perpetuate their genetic variation is urgently recommended, due the serious threat of extinction of the species.
  • No Conservation Action Required: 22 species that do not require any conservation action at this point in time.

 

Due to time constraints 266 species classified as Least Concern or Data Deficient were not assessed during the workshop.

The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.

Funding for the workshop was generously provided by Saint Louis Zoo and Chicago Zoological Society’s Chicago Board of Trade Endangered Species Fund, with Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Ecuador providing the workshop venue and equipment.


Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop for Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, March 26-30 2012

The Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources, at the Vietnamese Academy of Science and Technology in Hanoi, Vietnam, hosted a five-day amphibian conservation needs assessment workshop in March 2012. During the workshop, the conservation needs of 203 species of amphibians occurring in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia were assessed. Workshop participants in Hanoi, VietnamTwenty participants met during the five-day period, with representatives from Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Germany, France, China, Australia, the Philippines, and the USA. The workshop was jointly funded by grants from the Conservation Food and Health Foundation, the Conservation and Collection Management Committee of the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, and the Prince Bernhard Fund For Nature. Two main issues were re-iterated during the workshop. Firstly, there is very little known about many amphibian species in the wild in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, and a great deal more field research is required to obtain a thorough understanding of the status of the region’s amphibians. Secondly, although a number of species occur in protected areas within the region, most of these protected areas are not providing effective protection, and there is still collection of animals, habitat destruction for agriculture and mining taking place in these areas. This is especially evident in Cambodia where there is almost no real protection for natural habitat. During the workshop, 90 species were recommended for in situ conservation work to ensure their survival in the wild, 123 species (mostly classified as Data Deficient) require additional in situ research to determine their distribution or the threats they face, 5 species were identified as husbandry analogs for more threatened species or for ex situ research, 81 species were identified as being suitable for conservation education purposes and there were 25 species that do not require conservation action at this time. There are also a number of species that require further taxonomic work to determine correct species limits. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Conservation Needs Assessment workshop for Singapore, October 31-November 2, 2011

From October 31st – November 5th, Wildlife Reserves Singapore hosted an Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop and an Ex Situ Amphibian Conservation workshop, at Singapore Zoo. Around 35 people attended these workshops, which not only reviewed the conservation requirements of Singapore’s amphibians, but also provided guidance and training for staff from the new River Safari park which will include a number of amphibian conservation projects when it opens in 2012. The workshop was funded by the Wildlife Reserves Singapore Conservation Fund. The first three days of the workshop were devoted to field conservation of amphibians and included the conservation needs assessment, and a number of presentations and hands-on sessions focusing on Singapore’s amphibians and a variety of techniques used in the field during amphibian research trips. The assessment was facilitated by Kevin Johnson from the Amphibian Ark, and participants included staff from Wildlife Reserves Singapore, National Parks Board of Singapore, and the National University of Singapore. Presentations were given by Dr. Tzi. Ming Leong and Dr. David Bickford from the National University of Singapore, Dr. Nancy Karraker from the University of Hong Kong, Dr. Brad Wilson from Atlanta, USA, Dr. Phil Bishop from the Amphibian Survival Alliance and Ron Gagliardo from Amphibian Ark. Twenty-eight amphibian species were assessed during the workshop, with one species, Malaysian Horned Frog, Megophrys nasuta, being recommended for an ex situ rescue program. Eight species were recommended for in situ conservation actions, seven species require additional in situ research to be undertaken, two species were recommended for ex situ research, twelve species are suitable for either in situ or ex situ conservation education programs, and one species was recommended for cryopreservation. Fourteen species were considered to be currently safe in the wild, and not in need of any conservation action at this time. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page. The inclusion of a number of presentations and hands-on sessions was a first for an Amphibian Ark assessment workshop, and was very well received by the participants. These sessions provided a great insight into general amphibian biology, an overview of the amphibians of Singapore, specific field techniques such as capture and restraint, weighing, identification and sexing, minimizing the risk of disease transfer, and sampling techniques and protocols. An evening field trip to two sites in the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve was also included, during which, 14 species of amphibians were sighted. Amphibian Ark staff would like to thank the Wildlife Reserves Singapore Conservation Fund for their very generous support of this workshop, staff from Wildlife Reserves Singapore for their wonderful hospitality and friendship during the workshop, and all of the participants for their involvement during the workshops. We’re looking forward to seeing some great new amphibian exhibits and conservation programs at the River Safari when it opens next year.


Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop for the Caribbean, March 22-30, 2011

In March 2011, Amphibian Ark staff facilitated two Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshops in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, in the Caribbean. The first workshop, which also included the updating of many Red List Assessments, focussed on species from Haiti, the Dominican Republic and Jamaica. The second workshop assessed the amphibians of Puerto Rico and Cuba, plus a few species from the Lesser Antilles. During the nine days, sixteen field experts and observers worked with staff from the AArk, IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group and Conservation International, with various sub-groups being formed as necessary to tackle multiple assessments at the same time. One hundred and seventy-eight amphibian species were assessed for their conservation needs of which, 54 species occur in Haiti, 44 in the Dominican Republic, 24 in Jamaica, 62 in Cuba, 22 species in Puerto Rico and 6 from the Lesser Antilles. The assessment process resulted in the following recommendations: 25 species in need of ex situ Rescue programs; 112 species could still be saved in the wild with in situ conservation action; 41 species require further in situ research to determine more about the species population status and/or the threats they face; 78 species are currently undergoing, or are proposed for specific ex situ research that contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species; 90 species that are suitable for either in situ or ex situ conservation education programs; and 26 species recommended for cryopreservation. Only 12 species were not recommended for any conservation action. We are currently identifying additional field experts in the Lesser Antilles and Trinidad & Tobago to help complete the assessments for those islands. Data sheets will be updated as additional assessments are made. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page. During the workshop we reviewed the results of the species assessments for each country and discussed options for following up with various conservation actions identified during the workshop. Volunteers were identified in each country to be the focal point for continued actions, assessment updates, and to encourage amphibian conservation activities for the countries. These volunteers are: Susan Koenig and Iris Holmes for Jamaica; Rafael Joglar for Puerto Rico; Sixto Inchaustegui for the Dominican Republic; Luis Díaz and Ariel Rodríguez for Cuba and Joel Timyan for Haiti. We also spent several hours on the last day of the workshop discussing ex situ amphibian husbandry issues, with many examples of both simple and sophisticated facilities being shown and discussed. Participants found this particularly helpful, and they gained many good ideas to put into practice at their own facilities. Workshop participants enjoyed three trips during the workshop: a night walk around Parque Zoológico Nacional (ZooDom); a field trip to a wonderful cloud forest in the 23 km2 protected area Reserva Científica de Ebano Verde; and a night trip to the Santo Domingo Botanical Gardens. Several frog, lizard and snake species were found during these trips, as well as a couple of huge tarantulas. We’d like to extend our thanks to Adrell Núñez from ZooDom and Miguel Landestoy for their hospitality in providing these trips for us, thereby allowing us all to experience a little of the local flora and fauna. We’d also like to thank the Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund, which provided the funds to support this workshop.


Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment for Japan, Asa Zoo, Hiroshima, Japan, January 20-21, 2011

In January 2011, Asa Zoo in Hiroshima, was the host for an amphibian conservation needs assessment workshop, covering 62 native Japanese species. Mr. Daimaru, the Asa Zoo Director and Dr. Kazushi Kuwabara welcomed Japanese field experts, amphibian biologists and researchers, representatives from the Ministry of the Environment, AArk staff and observers to the workshop, and the first day began with a presentation on the Amphibian Ark and the assessment process, followed by one and a half days of species assessments. During the explanation of the assessment process, workshop participants suggested a number of small modifications to the process to better suit some of the amphibian programs in Japan, and to add additional clarity to the definitions of the questions. These suggestions have now been incorporated into the tool, and future workshops will benefit from them. The assessment of 62 species resulted in the following recommended conservation actions:

  • 1 species recommended for In Situ Research – This is a species that for one or more reasons requires further in situ research to be carried out as part of the conservation action for the species. One or more critical pieces of information is not known at this time.
  • 62 species that will benefit from In Situ Conservation – Species for which mitigation of threats in the wild may still bring about their successful conservation.
  • 34 species suitable for Ex Situ Research – Species undergoing specific applied research that directly contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species, in the wild (this would include clearly defined ‘model’ or ‘surrogate’ species).
  • 60 species that are suitable for Conservation Education – Species that are specifically selected for management – primarily in zoos and aquariums – to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors, in order to promote positive behavioural change. For example, when a species is used to raise financial or other support for field conservation projects (this would include clearly defined ‘flagship’ or ‘ambassador’ species).

  The assessment workshop concluded with presentations from a number of the workshop participants on their amphibian conservation work and some of the leading amphibian breeding and research programs. On the following day, a public amphibian workshop was held, which began with an update on the results of the assessment workshop from Dr. Kuwabara. This was followed by a presentation on the amphibian crisis by AArk’s Kevin Zippel, and then a tour of Asa Zoo’s Giant Salamander breeding facilities. In the afternoon all the participants were taken on a field tour to visit a Giant Salamander conservation area in the Shijihara River in Hiroshima Prefecture that Asa Zoo staff have been working with for many years. This was a great opportunity for us all to see the type of habitat that these fascinating animals live in, and to hear about the dedication of the people living in the village of Shijihara, Kitahiroshima-cho, Yamagata, Hiroshima Prefecture, who educate school children and visitors about the conservation of this iconic threatened species. We would like to thank Dr Kuwabara and Dr. Kanako Nishimoto for their many hours of organizing this workshop, the staff of the Asa Zoo for their wonderful hospitality, and Dr. Nishimoto and Dr. Yumiko Kato for their translations during the workshop. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Argentinean Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 23-25 October, 2010

A well-attended and very successful Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop was carried out from 23-25 October. It was co-funded by a Durrell Wildlife grant from USA Fish & Wildlife Service (capacity building for cnservation of amphibians in Argentina), Chester Zoo, AArk/EAZA, and the Buenos Aires Zoo who kindly hosted, providing a venue, equipment and copious refreshments. The workshop was organised under the auspices of the IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialists Group-Argentina, with most of the hard work being done by Marcos Vaira and his students. It was attended by eighteen amphibian biologists, PhD students, zoo professionals and government officials representing all regions of the country, and facilitated by AArk Taxon Officer Richard Gibson (Chester Zoo) and Luis Carillo (Zoofari, Mexico). Six species were identified for urgent ex situ rescue programs while eighteen were considered recoverable in situ if action was taken swiftly. Forty-one species need significant in situ research in order to determine threat levels, including impact of trade, population status and protected area coverage. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page. Much time was spent discussing the next steps in using the data from the workshop as a basis for a generic amphibian conservation action plan for Argentina and as a guide for species-specific recovery programs.


Guatemalan conservation needs assessment workshop, Guatemala City, Guatemala, 4-6 February, 2010

The Amphibian Ark facilitated an amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop for Guatemalan species, from 4th-6th February at the Museum of the University of San Carlos in Guatemala City. Participants at the workshop were Carlos Vasquez, Jonathan Campbell (Guatemalan Regional Chair of the IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group), Ted Papenfuss , Manuel Acevedo, Roderico Anzueto , Liza García, Jacobo Conde, Alejandra Zamora and Gustavo Ruano, and the workshop was facilitated by Kevin Johnson. During the workshop, 142 Guatemalan species were evaluated by the participants to assess actions that are required to ensure their survival, with species falling into one or more of six different conservation roles:

  • 34 species requiring rescue – Species that are in imminent danger of extinction (locally or globally) and requires ex situ management, as part of an integrated program, to ensure their survival.
  • 42 species requiring in situ conservation – Species for which mitigation of threats in the wild may still bring about their successful conservation.
  • 58 species requiring in situ research – Species that for one or more reasons require further in situ research to be carried out as part of the conservation action for the species. One or more critical pieces of information is not known at this time.
  • 12 species requiring ex situ research – Species undergoing specific applied research that directly contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species, in the wild (this would include clearly defined ‘model’ or ‘surrogate’ species).
  • 12 species suited to conservation education – Species that are specifically selected for management – primarily in zoos and aquariums – to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors, in order to promote positive behavioral change. For example, when a species is used to raise financial or other support for field conservation projects (this would include clearly defined ‘flagship’ or ‘ambassador’ species).
  • 37 species which do not currently require conservation action.

  At the end of the workshop, participants discussed the results, and the next steps that are required. Further in situ research work is currently underway, with a number of universities currently involved in field research. Interest is high in holding an amphibian husbandry workshop in Guatemala over the coming months to increase the in-country capacity to establish successful ex situ conservation programs. A proposal is currently being drafted to seek support for a small amphibian conservation breeding and display facility, with display facilities for one or two common frog and salamander species, and an off-display area where husbandry skills can be increased, and several species can be established for captive breeding. Funds for the workshop were generously provided by the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium Conservation Fund, and we are grateful for their support for this workshop. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop, Kandy, Sri Lanka, 2-3 November, 2009

AArk Taxon Officer Richard Gibson facilitated an Amphibian Conservation Needs Assessment workshop in Kandy, Sri Lanka on 2nd and 3rd November 2009. The workshop was organized by regional Amphibian Specialist Group Co-chair Anslem de Silva and was well-attended with twenty-four participants from a variety of backgrounds, many of whom were generously supported by Rohan Pethyiagoda, the Sri Lanka government’s Biodiversity Secretariat and grants from Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust’s International Training Centre. Two days of intensive discussion and deliberation, expertly assisted by Durrell Wildlife’s Gerardo Garcia and Jamie Copsey, resulted in a comprehensive assessment of the conservation needs for Sri Lanka’s 107 named species of frogs and caecilians and a draft Red List assessment for two newly-described species Philautus singu and Philautus tanu – both provisionally assessed as Endangered on the basis of limited distribution and extent of occurrence. Perhaps the most exciting revelation of the workshop was that at least one species thought to be extinct, Adenomus kandianus, is now thought to have been rediscovered – great news for Sri Lanka and the world amphibian conservationists alike. Ten species of frog were considered to be so close to extinction that ex situ ‘Rescue’ programs are justified while more encouragingly, a further twenty-two threatened species could probably be saved in situ with dedicated conservation action. Thirty-three species were identified which would benefit from ex situ research initiatives, reflecting both the relatively recent discovery of much of Sri Lanka’s amphibian diversity and the paucity of ecology and life-history studies. Approximately a quarter of the known species were recognized as having educational potential either nationally or locally and through a variety of means including public exhibition. With a brand new government zoo under development, guidance on educational and research program species couldn’t come at a more appropriate and convenient time. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Brazilian conservation needs assessment workshop, São Paulo, Brazil, 9-11 August, 2009

Fourteen experts in Brazilian amphibians, representing twelve institutions, gathered for a three-day Brazilian amphibian conservation needs assessment workshop at São Paulo Zoo, Brazil, from August 9-11, 2009. The workshop was facilitated by Richard Gibson and Kevin Johnson from the Amphibian Ark. The aim of the workshop was to identify priority threatened amphibian species and their immediate conservation needs. During the prioritization workshop, a total of 866 species were listed for review. The participants worked through all Critically Endangered, Endangered Vulnerable and Near Threatened species first (53 species), followed by Data Deficient species (198 species). Due to time constraints it was not possible to completely review all Least Concern species, but 90 Least Concern species were identified as having excellent conservation education potential. Workshop participants did not review 594 species, but additional local amphibian experts have been identified to assist with reviewing many of these species, and this will be undertaken in the next couple of months. Based on the data available during the workshop, Brazilian amphibian species were prioritized within the following conservation roles:

  • 14 species in the Rescue role – species that are in imminent danger of extinction (locally) and require ex situ management, as part of an integrated program, to ensure their survival.
  • 24 species in the In Situ Conservation role – species for which mitigation of threats in the wild may still bring about their successful conservation.
  • 204 species in the In Situ Research role – species that for one or more reasons require further in situ research to be carried out as part of the conservation action for the species. One or more critical pieces of information is not known at this time.
  • 19 species in the Ex Situ Research role – species undergoing specific applied research that directly contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species, in the wild (this would include clearly defined ‘model’ or ‘surrogate’ species).
  • 136 species identified for Conservation Education – species that are specifically selected for management – primarily in zoos and aquariums – to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors, in order to promote positive behavioral change.

  These figures will be very likely to change, once additional information has been received from amphibian experts who were not present at the workshop. As this information is received, the data sheet for Brazil will be updated, and the reports will be re-generated. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Indonesian conservation planning workshop, Bogor, Indonesia, 27-29 July, 2009

Over 50 people gathered at Taman Safari Indonesia, Cisarua, Bogor on July 27th, 2009 for the start of the amphibian workshop. After a welcome by the President of SEAZA, Mr. Jansen Manansang, presentations were given by Mr. Kevin Johnson from Amphibian Ark, Prof. Djoko Iskander from the Dosen Institut Teknologi Bandun, and Mirza Kusrini from Bogor Agricultural University. These presentations outlined the global amphibian crisis, the formation of the Amphibian Ark, and amphibian issues in Indonesia. During the prioritization workshop, a total of 381 species were reviewed, with data compiled for 207 species. Workshop participants did not have sufficient information to review the remaining 174 species, but additional local amphibian experts have been identified to assist with reviewing these species. Based on the data available during the workshop, Indonesian amphibian species were prioritized into the following conservation roles:

  • 182 species that for one or more reasons require further in situ research to be carried out as part of the conservation action for the species. One or more critical pieces of information is not known at this time.
  • 6 species undergoing specific ex situ research that directly contributes to the conservation of the species, or a related species, in the wild (this would include clearly defined ‘model’ or ‘surrogate’ species).
  • 1 species threatened through wild collection (e.g. as a food resource), which could be bred in captivity to replace the demand for wild harvested specimens.
  • 86 species that are specifically selected for conservation education purposes – primarily in zoos and aquariums – to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors, in order to promote positive behavioral change.

These figures will be likely to change slightly, once additional information has been received from amphibian experts who were not present at the workshop. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Prioritization workshop for Panamanian species, Panama, November 12-14 2008

The Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) hosted the three-day Panamanian Amphibian Prioritization Workshop from the 12th-14th of November 2008. The workshop, facilitated by Paul Crump from the Houston Zoo, was well attended with thirteen participants from ten different organizations. A total of 204 species were evaluated using the prioritization tool developed by Amphibian Ark. The workshop participants worked very efficiently, completing all evaluations after two days. The third day was spent discussing both implementation of the workshop results, and the production of a larger national amphibian conservation action plan. The participants identified four basic groupings of species based on their conservation need and thus dictates their ex situ “role”.

  1. Species that are likely extinct (ARK– 10%),
  2. Species that are stable now but will be exposed to threatening processes soon (RESCUE – 15%),
  3. Species for which the conservation status is completely unknown (NONE – 32%),
  4. Species that require no conservation action (NONE – 43%).

  All the species that fall into the third group were flagged for in situ assessment work. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Prioritization workshop for species in Hong Kong and Guangdong Province, Hong Kong, May 22-23 2008

Twenty-two participants representing seven organisations gathered at Ocean Park Hong Kong on May 22nd 2008 for the start of a two-day amphibian workshop. The two main aims of the workshop were to present a series of papers outlining some of the amphibian conservation activities that are currently underway in Hong Kong and Guangdong Province, and to attempt to assess and prioritize all amphibian species from the two areas for potential ex situ conservation programs. A number of presentations were given during the morning of the first day, and this was a great way for the presenters to share the work they are involved in with the other participants. The scope of the amphibian species prioritization workshop was all amphibian species in Hong Kong and Guangdong Province. This included 24 species that occur in Hong Kong, with one of these, Philautus romeri, being endemic. The species from Hong Kong included 2 Endangered, 2 Near Threatened, 2 Vulnerable, and 18 Least Concern species. All of these species, except for Philautus romeri also occur in the Guangdong Province. An additional 42 species that occur in the Guangdong province, but not in Hong Kong, were evaluated during the workshop. Of the 66 species evaluated, three species, Andrias davidianus (Chinese Giant Salamander, 大鯢), Philautus romeri (Romer’s Tree Frog, 香港(羅氏)小樹蛙) and Cynops orphicus (Dayang Newt, 潮汕蠑螈) were ranked considerably higher than the remaining species. A number of research projects are underway in China with Andrias davidianus and considerable experience exists with commercial farming of the species. A captive program already exists for Philautus romeri, with Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Gardens and Ocean Park already involved in captive breeding and release of the species. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page and a more detailed report of the workshop is also available.


Southern African species prioritization workshop, Johannesburg, April 25-28 2008

More than 200 southern African amphibian species were prioritized for conservation action during a two-day AArk-facilitated prioritization workshop hosted by the Johannesburg Zoo. About twenty amphibian experts from all walks of life – field, university, museum, zoo, NGO, government and students – gathered to consider and answer the various questions needed to identify ex situ roles and priorities among the region’s threatened frogs. AArk Taxon Officer Richard Gibson facilitated the meeting, ably assisted by Jesse Krebs from Omaha’s Henry Doorly Zoo who expertly manipulated the Global Amphibian Assessment (GAA) files for reference by the participants. Four species were recommended for urgent rescue programs, twenty species for ex situ research initiatives to investigate both biology and husbandry, and fifteen species were identified as suitable for educational purposes. Interestingly, two of the latter educational species are actually seriously threatened but it was considered that a concerted educational effort was likely all that was necessary to improve their status. The process ran very smoothly, with the support of all present, and resulted in a tidy list of species prioritized for Rescue, Research and Educational purposes. Prioritization of about 35 species from Angola, Malawi, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe was not completed owing to lack of information and familiarity with them in the wild. Further assistance will be sought to complete these species scores in coming weeks. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page. Additional information is being gathered for those species which couldn’t be adequately prioritized with the expertise present at the meeting.


Malaysian species prioritization workshop, Kuala Lumpur, January 15-18 2008

Zoo Negara in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, hosted an Amphibian Workshop in January 2008. Thirty-nine delegates from eight countries attended the workshop, which was held in the magnificent Palace of the Golden Horses hotel. The first day of the workshop began with an opening ceremony, with a number of distinguished guests, and was followed by an afternoon of presentations from some of the delegates, in a regular conference format. This was a great way for each of the participants to learn more about the work their colleagues have been involved in, and for the delegates to outline their particular interests and the projects they and their institutions are involved in. Two separate simultaneous workshops were then run over the following two days, one focusing on amphibian species prioritization, and the other focusing on the ex situ management of amphibians. Participants in the species prioritization workshop used the Amphibian Ark species selection and prioritization tool to evaluate 211 species which occur in Malaysia. Sixty-two of these are endemic species. Seven additional taxa (Ansonia latifi, Ansonia latirostra, Ansonia endauensis, Ansonia sukumarani, Ingerophrynus gollumi, Rana monjerai and Theloderma licin) were added to the species from the Global Amphibian Assessment’s list of Malaysian taxa. Unfortunately the participants at the workshop did not have enough information regarding forty-six of the species, and these were only partly evaluated. Other Malaysian amphibian experts were identified, and these people have been asked if they would be willing to assist in completing the evaluation of these forty-six species. The participants collectively came up with common analogue species for the ten highest ranking species, and suggested that the ex situ community in Malaysia uses these analogues to gain husbandry and reproductive experience, before working with the more endangered species. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page and a summary report of the workshop is also available.


Venezuelan species prioritization workshop, Rancho Grande, 17th-18th November, 2007

A species prioritization workshop for Venezuelan amphibian species was held in Rancho Grande, 17th-18th November 2007. Twenty-five participants attended the workshop, and they were mainly researchers and experts from different parts of the country and some zoo representatives. The prioritization workshop was facilitated by Luis Carrillo (CBSG Mexico) and Diana Sarmiento (ALPZA) and it was organized by AVZA (Venezuelan Zoo and Aquarium Association) and ALPZA. Venezuela occupies the 8th position on country amphibian diversity with 293 species. Nevertheless, 26% of their species are threatened mainly by habitat destruction. To date there is one species recognized as extinct (Atelopus vogli). The workshop begun with the explanation of the methodology and goals seek by AArk. Sixty-nine species were evaluated, but unfortunately twenty-five of them were incomplete evaluated due to lack of information for the participants. The top ten prioritized species for Venezuela are the following:

Atelopus pinangoi   Atelopus oxyrhynchus
Atelopus sorianoi   Colostethus leopardalis
Mannophryne collaris   Mannophryne cordilleriana
Atelopus carbonerensis   Mannophryne neblina
Atelopus mucubajensis   Nephelobated alboguttatus

The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Colombian species prioritization workshop, Bogotá, 11th-12th November, 2007

The workshop for prioritization of Colombian amphibian species was successfully organized and facilitated by Luis Carrillo from CBSG Mexico and Diana Sarmiento from ALPZA. Fifteen people attended the two day workshop in Bogotá where we had representatives from Colombian zoos, amphibian experts and researchers from universities and NGOs. The workshop was organized by ALPZA and ACOPAZOA (Colombian Zoo and Aquarium Association). The workshop began with representative introductions followed by presentations on workshop methodology and AArk’s spreadsheet for species selection and prioritization. Participants with the help of the workshop’s facilitator began evaluating all the CR, EN and VU amphibian species. A total of 209 species were evaluated. Unfortunately the participants didn’t have the knowledge to evaluate 130 species, mainly due to lack of search in some areas (due to guerrilla risk) meaning that there are some information gaps, but participants agreed to contact other amphibian specialist that couldn’t attend the workshop to have some of this species evaluated too. An important part of the workshop was dedicated to gathering new information on the species evaluated. Information focused on presence of chytrid, new populations discovered and so on. The top ten prioritized species for Colombia are:

Phyllobates terribilis   Atelopus longibrachius
Atelopus famelicus   Bolitoglossa pandi
Atelopus farci   Atelopus eusebianus
Atelopus monohernandezi   Atelopus minutulus
Cryptobatrachus nicefori   Atelopus subornatu

At the end of the workshop ECOFONDO (Mariela Osorno) showed preliminary results of the project in Magdalena River and Amazonas working together with the communities to develop local awareness and interest for amphibians and water conservation. ECOFONDO is leading a campaign for keeping water as a public resource. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Costa Rican species prioritization workshop, San Jose, 31st October – 3rd November, 2007

AArk Taxon Officer Kevin Johnson facilitated a three-day prioritization workshop in Costa Rica, hosted by Fundacion Pro Zoologicos and Simon Bolivar Zoo in San Jose. There were approximately twenty participants at the workshop, including Federico Bolaños from the Universidad de Costa Rica and a number of his students, zoo staff, CBSG Mesoamérica staff, and experts from the private sector. The participants worked through the prioritization of 188 species, and attempted to answer the questions for many taxa in the third section (Program Implementation) of the prioritization tool. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.


Species prioritization workshop for North American and Puerto Rico, Fort Worth, TX, USA, 30-31st July and 1st August, 2007

Twenty people, including two Amphibian Ark facilitators and key amphibian experts from institutions in Canada, USA and Mexico gathered at Fort Worth Zoo, Texas, in August 2007 to work through prioritization of species in North America and Puerto Rico. Due to time constraints, not all species were attempted, but the group prioritized 86 species. Of these 10 were from Puerto Rico, 5 occur in Canada, and the remainder are from the US and Mexico. Of the high scoring species, half were in the Eleutherodactylus genus, from Puerto Rico. The complete results from the workshop are available on the Assessment Results page.

Print Friendly
 

mycosel agar ingredients in benadryl g.e. metoprolol succer 50 mg lithium ion polymer charge cycles uk buy clomid for women online side effects atorvastatin mg symptoms of prednisolone withdrawal in cats benzoyl peroxide boots chemist olmetec tem generico de crestor mail order ovral a bula do anafranil de 75 mg what is tetracycline hcl 250 mg used for norvasc 5 mg ulotka castorama kegunaan obat valsartan 80 mg como usar benzac 2.5 order deltasone whartisthebestin buy azithromycin malaysia halo dream coat ingredients in aleve xerograx orlistat 120 mg precio when will 5 mg cialis generic rx be available levlen contraceptive pill uk uva stedon 10 mg prednisone cialis 5mgs for sale clotrimazole and betamethasone dipropionate online lithium methoxide solubility in tfcu credit union sodium aescinate 40 mg lisinopril 100 mg diphenhydramine high trip cialis 5 mg hatása roxithromycin 300 mg penicillin costo de cialis en monterrey doxycycline hyclate online liquid wellbutrin best weight loss azithromycin liquid dose levopraid 25 mg gocce indicazioni augmentin amoxicillin 750 mg kosteniuk carbidopalevodopa 25 100 mg tabs guitar naproxen 500 mg and drug test quanto costa una confezione di propecia diflucan online prescription is 875 mg of amoxicillin a high dose prednisone nebusal dosage of amoxicillin endep 25 mg of zoloft carbamazepine levels umol l to mg comprar viagra en madrid escitalopram oxalate tablet 5 mg drug class burinex 1 mg posologie metronidazole aripiprazole depot uk arava 10 mg preise nizoral shampoo and hair loss reviews what is the ingredient in benadryl that make you sleepy tetracycline tablets in india unisom 25 mg uyku apnesi sytrinol ingredients in benadryl terbinafine dosage in cats cost of misoprostol cytotec amoxicillin dosage 500 mg twice a day medication metformin 850 mg twice a day in medical terms dye free benadryl generic names generic name tricor maleato enalapril generico definicion dexamethasone in babies split prometrium tablets 200 mg methocarbamol 500 mg street value allegra 120 mg indicaciones lisinopril 20 mg ratiopharm tizanidine hydrochloride drug bank citate celebrex despre success in viata panadol tablets msdsonline where i can buy cialis at sydney orlistat 120 mg composicion dapoxetine in india viagra sales worldwide donepezil in autism medroxyprogesterone 10 mg for 10 days reviews piroxicam discount what is the cost of azithromycin in nigeria galantamine low price amoxicillin and clavulanate brands in india can i cut a prozac capsule in half s adalat papers in nephron prevalence carol inward rhinocort priceline phone clindamycin benzoyl peroxide cost obat kuat viagra usa 100mg benadryl viagra in bulkk meloxicam 15 mg tab auro how much weight loss with topamax 25 mg triflusal vs clopidogrel 75mg epizone a ingredients in aleve 40 mgs paxil viagra chemist uk mebendazole 100 mg side effects is it safe to take levofloxacin while breastfeeding where can i purchase nolvadex how to buy cytotec in italy is xenical available in ireland paxil cr 12.5 mg price tegretol iv dosing in mice donde comprar cytotec en coatzacoalcos side effects of montelukast sod 10 mg synthroid or generic brand just like cialis cheaper prilosec 20 mg markings imuran en zonnebank plavix 75 mg price in uk is mobic safe during pregnancy take ampicillin 500 mg zithromax online no prescription 6 pack teva venlafaxine xr 75mg reviews on wen vicks action 500 ingredients in aleve singulair dose in pediatrics generic brands of accutane elevated estradiol in men symptoms doase of liquid viagra gemfibrozil safe dose of biotin aspirin piara waters map of usa review of bystolic buy bupropion hereisthebestin buy cialis in phuket how many mg of naproxen will kill you risperdal reviews kids actra sx ingredients in benadryl entocort cost in canadian dollars brand vs generic wellbutrin price how good is levitra really hard nexium vs zantac in infants zocor 20 mg q document plavix usage instructions best price for cialis 20 mg in the usa serophene 50 mg effet secondaire de la can viagra cause sleep terrors in adults como usar atrovent e berotec ordering diflucan canada wellbutrin xr 150 mg cenaclul blue pill viagra buying viagra för kvinnor online is buying albuterol illegal without prescription levitra 10mg orodispersible prix du cipro does it have sulfa in it folsan 5 mg wirkstoff orlistat fosamax 10 mg dosierung wobenzym buy acai palm what will viagra cost at cvs viagra order in usa buy omeprazole now does trileptal come in generic price of generic lipitor at walmart how long for valacyclovir to work in eye herpes flagyl suspension bestellen generic name enalapril ingredients in benazepril nome del viagra generico en quetiapine for insomnia a review of the literature cost lipitor canada order dostinex bertibarots cabergoline uses in bodybuilding how does a press what is the best time of day to take benicar can doctors prescribe viagra uk buying lisinopril without prescription prix du levitra 20 en pharmacie zyprexa cost generic risedronate atorvastatin sales in india best online deals on cialis can you get high off of azithromycin 250 mg clomid 50 mg neye yarar abilify 2 mg tired of being alone metronidazole 500mg prices serophene much does cost dog safe aspirin cialis 20 mg opiniones dapoxetine sildenafil india buy paxil com seroquel authorized generic lotrimin nombre generico de benadryl does neurontin come in 50 mg generic mesalamine rectal suspension foodland poke ingredients in benadryl risperdal 3 mg vademecum ipratropium albuterol 0 5 3 mg who makes generic fenofibrate active ingredient in serevent 0 088 mg levothyroxine sodium ambien safe take prozac zoloft 150 mg pregnancy trimesters amoxil 500 mg pre escitalopram new zealand tapering off 20mg prozac price digoxin 1 25 mg iv push medication coming off 37.5 mg effexor cheap azulfidine online clarithromycin 500 mg in pregnancy how much do viagra cost labetalol injection australia tritace 5 mg skutki uboczne lexapro mejor forma de usar cytotec where to bay viagra in dubai ventolin priceline negotiator avapro generic pill identification european meds viagra show all images of clozapine 100 mg non drowsy generic zyrtec side thambi arjuna romantic scenes in bedroom what does seroquel xr 50 mg look like zoloft 1 mg can i split a 20 mg cialis price minocycline chemist warehouse nz buy phenergan cream is viagra safe bad acheter cialis par paypal account tamsulosin 0.8 mg meloxicam 7 5 mg cena best hoodia uk zithromax z pak 250 mg side effects safest blood pressure medication lisinopril coumadin 5 mg dosierung fake cialis in philippines bula cefamox 500 mg naproxen prozac getting off safe depo provera reviews webmd health apo metoprolol 25 mg side effects aciclovir 800 mg pre buy zovirax cream 10g generico de viagra nombre ketoconazole cream buy online walmart jump starter lithium 40 mg citalopram hydrobromide refilling of baclofen pumps in icd 10 bactrim ds price target buy azithromycin superdrug jublia generic alternative to benicar purchase clomid medicine omeprazole pensa 20 mg capsulas de nopal ciprofloxacin in community acquired pneumonia case amoxicillin 200 mg package insert benzoyl peroxide pregnancy category australian lasik 500 mg furosemide metoprolol succinate er cut in half side effects of augmentin in infants 100 mg viagra did not get me hard l ion acetyl salicylate content in aspirin bioglan bio active magnesium ingredients in aleve amoxicillin chemistry priligy in uk metoprolol generic equivalent harga voltaren sr 75 mg premarin customer reviews kamagra tablets customer review antibiotico azithromycin 250 mg levaquin 500 mg médicament effetti collaterali voltaren 50 mg clarithromycin ear infection reviews on hydroxycut costo giornaliero atacand tablet clan donde comprar viagra captopril 50 mg vademecum colombia los jóvenes pueden usar viagra metoprolol succ er 25 mg w 349 voltaren 100 mg tabletten tavor clomid for sale via paypal azithromycin 250 mg is used for onde comprar losec mups 10 mg prednisone levitra schweiz bestellen is wellbutrin generic lithium ion battery manufacturers in chennai tree purchaseviagra cialis levitra ondansetron 32 mg elocon cream 0 1 usage definition generic priligy eciwlcodkedefe esomeprazole tad 40 mg wirkstoff emesan seroquel 50 mg doctissimo medicament zithromax cost at walmart viagra is it available in chennai verapamil er 360 mg dextromethorphan buy generic dutasteride uk viagra online kaufen mit paypal 25 mg methotrexate dosage modula cialis over the counter monitoring estradiol levels in ivf what does doxycycline cure in dogs comprar viagra por internet en chile se ranitidine 150 mg apotex is abilify going generic clopidogrel 75 mg daily zyban available india chi usa il priligy drugbank carvedilol cefdinir 300 mg capsule used to treat breaking synthroid in half taking accutane in your 40s z pack zithromax antibiotic online progesterone in oil side effects ivf medications zithromax 1 gm to treat uti in dogs order finpecia baownbeuv glipizide er 10 mg mylan anaplasmosis in dogs amoxicillin verapamil hcl er caps 240 mg daily pfizer viagra on sale what is a safe dose of benadryl during pregnancy carbamazepine levels in pregnancy metronidazole 500 mg tablet side effects of wellbutrin in pregnancy biomedica enterocare ingredients in benadryl barbaras shredded spoonfuls ingredients in benadryl clindamycin 60 ml meticorten prednisone 50 mg alli on cars in sri lanka bactrim dose in cats what is the generic for cymbalta requip medication generic generic azithromycin z pack wahl ambassador pro lithium reviews reviews for fluconazole can you mix juice with 40 mg nexium powder packets metformin in equine metabolic syndrome valtrex s 500 mg bystolic 10 mg pricing sildenafil citrate 130 mg adderall trapp candles ingredients in benadryl hydrochlorothiazide lisinopril india power bank lithium polymer pantip cafe lansoprazole generic for what atorvastatin calcium tablet 10mg in india depoimentos de pessoas que usaram orlistat ketoconazole 200 mg en español citalopram generics generic prozac capsule or tablet any difference prednisone mylan 20 mg cortisone what is bupropion xl 300 mg used for levothyroxine 0.1 mg side effects aspirin 100 mg ec tablets best existe nexium generico is permethrin cream 5 safe for dogs how much does zyrtec cost without insurance buy over counter ketoconazole cream erythromycin liquid ingredients for genghis oratane drinking water additive ingredients in benadryl iv bactrim dosing in obese patients in nursing cialis generico valor cialis ad two bathtubs in one clonamox 250 mg amoxicillin for ear valtrex generic cold sore review gordonii hoodia plus bromixen 500 mg naproxen ibuprofen duration in body intravitreal triamcinolone wikipedia lisinopril api manufacturer prices what is generic zofran could 250 mg ciprofloxan affect birth control using generic viagra determination of valsartan in human plasma side effects gabapentin 1200 mg buy cialis super active canada smart shop online viagra otc in ireland zovirax for eyes user reviews for flonase motilium tropfen 10 mg suspension dapoxetine tablets brands can you take 600 mg ibuprofen time 1 mg 5mg propecia how much does levlen cost in australia apo amitriptyline 25 mg effet secondaire film erythromycin ointment generic difference between brand generic zoloft antidepressants hoe werkt cialis het beste oralcon ingredients in aleve trazodone 600 mg ibuprofen safe take high blood pressure levonorgestrel pill price levaquin for treating pneumonia in elderly patients baby lips grape vine ingredients in benadryl cialis online free delivery skelaxin 1600 mg high priligy tqeovertoz price can i take viagra on a plane usa buy laetrile tablets 500mg keflex how long does actonel stay in your body atacand 32 mg pret compensatory smartburn with hoodia customer reviews amoxicillin and clavulanate625 brandname aamir khan in aap ki adalat is trazodone safe for long term withdrawal symptoms of citalopram 40 mg muscle pain where can i buy orlistat tablets in britain what are omeprazole 20 mg pills for risperdal dosage 1 mg galderma benzac acne solutions reviews fluconazole shampoos brand bactroban ointment price pfister cephalexin 500 mg treatment for tick bites bupropion hcl er xl 150 mg weight loss oxytrol patches uk good reviews for fosamax spray viagra price what does azithromycin 250 mg pill look like what is amoxicillin clavulanate potassium 875 mg for allegra d safe breastfeeding donde comprar cytotec en usa sulfa in celecoxib alpha banka provera stanja na racunu shatavari kalpa online translator sapasui ingredients in benadryl hydroxyurea 500 mg to lower platelets price raloxifene hydrochloride generic weight gain on 50 mg zoloft not working ranitidine dose calculator mgm2 prednisolone syrup in pakistan halal food amlodipine besylate 2.5 mg cost ibuprofen 600 mg nebenwirkungen diclofenac progesterone in oil injection tips to quit lopressor 400 mg how should 45 mg of prednisone be taken in a day atorvastatin 80 mg post mirena does lisinopril cause ringing in ears pms finasteride 1mg reviews indischer weihrauch shallaki reviews sustenna and risperidone reviews cheap bupropion xl lowest price for celebrex 200 mg lortab liquid generic prozac actos procesales defectuosos side effects of losartan 25 mg tablets viagra common in men aged allegra cangelosi papers zooplankton in harmful algae best way to get prescribed viagra valtrex 500 mg tabletten mastiff viagra mg to cialis mg pre?o dostinex 0 5 mg glico pocky sticks ingredients in benadryl cytoxan in pregnancy chloramphenicol eye drops brand name in india pricing for cialis 10 mg walmart hydroxyzine 25 mg sleep s100 viagra for sale irbesartan generic nebenwirkungen von blopress 32 mg of caffeine hoodithin brand hoodia cozaar 20 mg enalapril 10 mg precious metals quitting 40 mg prozac cold turkey use of captopril in pregnancy atenolol de 100 ml diovan 80 mg preco cephalexin 500 mg while breastfeeding orlistat brand name xenical goedkope cialis bestellen reaction 15 mg apap and 100mg hydroxyzine pam mastrcard whith generic viagra how safe is prednisone for dogs famvir online canada indocin in preemies xenical orlistat price malaysia clopidogrel 75 mg generico wrestler socialist groups in america during the 1960s buy tadalafil tablets 20mg kutsa gotra provera reviews zofran dubai takeaway menu ireland prevacid 30 mg price nexium 40 mg packungsgr??e is it safe to take allegra and claritin united states babe levitra buying viagra otc in vietnam blood pressure medication lisinopril 10 mg how many ml of amoxicillin for a 2 year old buy obagi tretinoin cream appetrol ingredients in aleve when will generic sildenafil be available vit acell ingredients in benadryl blood thinners and viagra in older men can norvasc be crushed for delivery buy lithium ion battery for cars kamagra next day delivery paypal migraine specialist in pittsburgh clotrimazole 20 mg crema de zahar bijsluiter terbinafine actavis 250 mg miracle ear positive reviews on effexor 30 mg tadalafil levonorgestrel compra online erythromycin tablets brand name metformine 500 mg actavis et conception medicamento orlistat 120 mg bula protonix 40 mg generic name over the counter viagra in los angeles ca india tv aap ki adalat narendra modi interview medicament prednisolone sandoz 20 mg nortriptyline reviews for depression bcaa sr 825 mg amoxicillin levothyroxine consumer reviews discount pharmacy propecia purchase is naproxen 500 mg an opiate nz cialis price rx amitriptyline hcl 10 mg adalat compresse 10 mg comprar pastillas cytotec en caracas domperidone 10 mg ahumada name citalopram sandoz 20 mg biverkningar av haldol ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel reviews on washers gabapentin price cvs erythromycin ophthalmic ointment dosage in newborns olmesartan brand name in india celebrex and vioxx off the market generic viagra fast cheap in usa no prescription pipamperon 40 mg bijwerkingen prednisone hoodia gordonii onde comprar portugal soccer