Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 June 2022 | 14(6): 21282–21284
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893
(Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7989.14.6.21282-21284
#7989 | Received 26 April 2022 | Finally accepted 27 May 2022
Comments on “The Dragonflies and
Damselflies (Odonata) of Kerala – Status and Distribution”
A. Vivek
Chandran 1 & K. Muhamed Sherif 2
1 Charutha house, Ayyappa
Nagar, Punkunnam, Thrissur, Kerala 680002, India.
2 Shipha Manzil, Puliyanam
Kunnu PO, Chalavara,
Palakkad, Kerala 679505, India.
1 avivekchandran2@gmail.com
(corresponding author), 2 mksherifc@gmail.com
Editor: Anonymity requested. Date of publication: 26 June 2022 (online & print)
Citation: Chandran, A.V. & K.M. Sherif
(2022). Comments on “The
Dragonflies and Damselflies (Odonata) of Kerala – Status and Distribution”. Journal of Threatened Taxa 14(6): 21282–21284. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7989.14.6.21282-21284
Copyright: © Chandran & Sherif 2022. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: None.
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Abstract: This is a rejoinder to the
article “The Dragonflies and Damselflies (Odonata) of Kerala – Status and
Distribution”. In the said paper, certain species are of doubtful occurrence in
Kerala and the Western Ghats. First reports of certain species which were
available in open-access biodiversity portals and published articles in
peer-reviewed journals were ignored. Additions to the checklists have been made
without conducting taxonomic investigations, or in one case, even presenting a
photograph. These shortcomings will lead to confusion and misunderstanding
among odonatologists and naturalists in the region.
Keywords: Biodiversity documentation,
checklist, insecta, rejoinder, research ethics,
Western Ghats.
We would like to commend Nair et
al. (2021) for attempting to compile checklists of Odonata species recorded
from the Western Ghats and within the political boundaries of Kerala state.
Regional checklists form the baseline of biodiversity documentation and are
crucial for conservation planning. However, in the said paper, certain species
are of doubtful occurrence in Kerala and the Western Ghats. First reports of
certain species which were available in open-access biodiversity portals and
published articles in peer-reviewed journals were ignored. Additions to the
checklists have been made without conducting taxonomic investigations, or in
one case, even presenting a photograph. These shortcomings will lead to
confusion and misunderstanding among odonatologists and naturalists in the
region. The missteps in the paper can be discussed under four heads:
1. Misappropriation of first
records
a. Platylestes
platystylus (Rambur, 1842) was recorded for
the first time from Kerala by Rison Thumboor in 2018
from Thrissur district. This record is available in the Global Biodiversity
Information Facility (Ueda 2021). There are also published records of the
species from the state (Emiliyamma et al. 2020;
Rison & Chandran 2020; Chandran et al. 2021), but these records were
ignored by the authors.
b. Pseudagrion
australasiae Selys,
1876 was also recorded for the first time from the state by Rison Thumboor from Thrissur district. This record is also
available in the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (India Biodiversity
Portal 2021). In this case also, published records of the species (Chandran et
al. 2020, 2021) were ignored.
2. Addition of species in the
checklist without presenting the results of taxonomic examination
a. Crocothemis
erythraea (Brullé,
1832)
This species
is common in southern Europe and throughout Africa. It also
occurs across western Asia as far as southern China (Clausnitzer 2013). It is known to occur within Indian
limits (Subramanian & Babu 2017), but has not
been recorded from the Western Ghats (Subramanian et al. 2018). The
authors claim to have recorded this species from Munnar, Kerala and have
provided a photograph as evidence. However, C. erythraea
very closely resembles Crocothemis servilia (Drury, 1773), a species seen commonly
throughout Kerala. Hence, it is unwise to include it in the checklist of Kerala
or the Western Ghats without proper taxonomic examination of specimens.
b. Zygonyx
torridus (Kirby, 1889)
This species
is widespread across many African countries, parts of Europe and Asia (Dow et
al. 2016). In the Western Ghats, it has been recorded only from
Karnataka state (Subramanian et al. 2018). The authors claim to have
recorded the species from Kerala without presenting any photographic evidence
of it.
c. Tramea
virginia Rambur, 1842
This species
is known to occur in parts of India and many southeastern
Asian countries (Dow 2020). In the Western Ghats, there are records from
Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu (Subramanian et al. 2018). The authors have
added the species to the checklist of Kerala based on a published record
(Sharma et al. 2007) and provide no further evidence for its occurrence in
Kerala. It has to be noted that in the paper cited by the authors, no taxonomic
description or photograph of T. virginia is
given.
3. Extralimital species added in
the checklist of Kerala without presenting any evidence
a. Heliogomphus
kalarensis Fraser, 1934
This species
is known only from the type specimen, a male, collected by Fraser from Kalar, at the foot of Mettupalayam
Ghat (Fraser 1934). The location clearly falls in
Tamil Nadu. The authors have added it to the checklist of Kerala without
presenting any evidence.
b. Macromia
flavicincta Selys, 1874
This species
is endemic to India and has been recorded only from Maharashtra and West Bengal
(Subramanian et al. 2018). The authors have included the species in the
checklist of Kerala without presenting any evidence.
c. Idionyx
nadganiensis Fraser, 1924
This species
is known only from two female specimens collected by Fraser (1936). The type
locality is mentioned as “Nilgiri Wynaad”
and the geographical locations mentioned as its range probably fall outside the
present political boundaries of Kerala (Fraser 1924). It should be noted that
the boundaries between Kerala and the neighbouring states were redrawn after
independence and also during the reorganisation of states. Keeping these
caveats in mind, Subramanian et al. (2018) chose to show its
distribution only in Tamil Nadu. Again, the authors have included this species
in the checklist of Kerala without presenting any evidence of its occurrence
here.
d. Idionyx
periyashola Fraser, 1939
This species
is also known only from the type specimen and the type locality is uncertain
(Subramanian 2011). Subramanian et al. (2018) show its distribution only
in the state of Tamil Nadu. The authors have chosen to include it in the
checklist of Kerala without giving any evidence of its occurrence here.
4. Other errors/omissions
a. Bradinopyga
konkanensis Joshi & Sawant, 2020
This species,
described recently from Maharashtra, has been recorded from Kidoor
in Kasaragod district of Kerala (Haneef et al. 2021). Its identity was
confirmed in the paper by diagnosing its wing venation and structure of
secondary genitalia of a male specimen. Even though the authors have referred
this paper, the species has not been included in the list. The authors state
that the species “has not been authentically reported from Kerala.”
b. Idionyx
minima Fraser, 1931
The
photograph presented as of Idionyx minima (Figure
5E) is actually of a female Macromidia donaldi (Fraser, 1924). In the case of I. minima,
the abdomen is black and unmarked (Fraser 1931). A close inspection of the
photograph given reveals a yellow mid-dorsal stripe on the individual’s abdomen
characteristic of M. donaldi.
c. Indolestes
pulcherrrimus (Fraser, 1924) and Indothemis
limbata (Selys, 1891)
Even though
Muneer P.K. has been credited with the records of these two species, a
published record of which he is the first author has not been cited (Munner & Chandran 2020). Presenting these records as
published for the first time is misleading.
Citizen scientists contribute
their observations to open-access biodiversity portals such as iNaturalist and India Biodiversity Portal with the hope
that their contributions would further research and aid in the conservation of
species and their habitats. It is with this purpose in mind that the
observations are pooled into the Global Biodiversity Information Facility
(GBIF). Only ‘research grade’ observations of iNaturalist
and ‘publication grade’ observations of India Biodiversity Portal are sourced
into GBIF, which enhances the authenticity of such records. If the authors are
of the opinion that these records are insufficient, they should have at least
considered papers already published in peer-reviewed journals before claiming
their own observations as first records. The misappropriation of such records
is unacceptable. Further, considering the fact that odonates
are insects, any new record from the region should be backed with detailed
taxonomic examination. If specimens are not available for such study, detailed
photographs showing taxonomic features are necessary to establish the presence
of the species in the region. Even though the authors have included photographs
of many common species such as Pantala flavescens (Fabricius, 1798)
and Urothemis signata
(Rambur, 1842), they have not presented photographs of species such as M.
flavicincta and Z. torridus
which they claim as new records.
The comments provided above need
to be considered before the checklists prepared by Nair et al. (2021)
are used by biodiversity managers, researchers, and interested public. It will
be beneficial if the authors address the issues pointed out and publish a corrigendum.
References
Chandran,
A.V., A. Wilson & S.K. Jose (2020). Odonates
of Irinjalakuda ponds of central Kerala, India. BugsRAll. Zoo’s Print 35(10): 26–33. https://www.zoosprint.zooreach.org/index.php/zp/article/view/7142/6474
Chandran
A.V., S.K. Jose & S.V. Gopalan (2021). Dragonflies and damselflies (Insecta: Odonata) of the Kole
Wetlands, central Kerala, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(3):
17963–17971. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5885.13.3.17963-17971
Clausnitzer, V. (2016). Crocothemis
erythraea. The IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species 2016: e.T59859A83846274. Downloaded on 26 April 2022. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T59859A83846274.en
Dow, R.A.,
J.P. Boudot, V. Clausnitzer,
F. Suhling, S. Ferreira, K.D.B. Dijkstra, W.
Schneider & B. Samraoui (2016). Zygonyx
torridus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species 2016: e.T60078A83877723. Downloaded on 26 April 2022. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T60078A83877723.en
Dow,
R.A. (2020). Tramea virginia. The
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020:
e.T163702A138282735. Downloaded on 26 April 2022. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-1.RLTS.T163702A138282735.en
Emiliyamma, K.G., M.J. Palot
& C. Charesh (2020). A new species of Platylestes Selys
(Odonata: Zygoptera: Lestidae)
from the coastal area of Kannur District, Kerala, India. Journal of
Threatened Taxa 12(13): 16854–16860. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5209.12.13.16854-16860
Fraser, F.C.
(1924). A survey of
the Odonata fauna of western India with special remarks on the genera Macromia and Idionyx
and description of thirty new species. Records of the Indian Museum 26(5):
423–522.
Fraser, F.C.
(1931). Addition to
the survey of the Odonata (dragonfly) fauna of Western India, with descriptions
of nine new species. Records of the Indian Museum 33: 443–474.
Fraser, F.C.
(1934). Fauna of
British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Odonata, Vol II. Taylor &
Francis group, London, 398 pp.
Fraser, F.C.
(1936). Fauna of
British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Odonata, Vol III. Taylor
& Francis group, London, 461 pp.
Haneef, M.,
B.R.S. Crasta & A.V. Chandran (2021). Reportof
Bradinopyga konkanensis
Joshi & Sawant, 2020 (Insecta :Odonata) from
Kerala, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(8): 19173–19176. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6484.13.8.
19173-19176
India
Biodiversity Portal (2022). India Biodiversity Portal publication grade dataset. Occurrence
dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/rs5upd. Accessed via GBIF.org on 27 October
2021. https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/2598676526
Muneer, P.K.
& A.V. Chandran (2020). A preliminary study of Odonate diversity in
Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary. Report submitted to Kerala Forests & Wildlife
Department, 42 pp. https://www.ferns.org.in/resources/wyd-wls-odonate-2020.pdf?fbclid=IwAR18pCIiU3ECrn8fIgftt0CF3729xyhTE-uktrt8qEkHSNy3wAok717TDhY
Nair, V.P.,
K.A. Samuel, M.J. Palot & K. Sadasivan
(2021). The
Dragonflies and Damselflies (Odonata) of Kerala – Status and Distribution. Entomon 46(3): 185–238. https://doi.org/10.33307/entomon.v46i3.609
Rison, K.J.
& A.V. Chandran (2020). Observations
of the damselfly Platylestes cf. platystylus Rambur, 1842 (Insecta:
Odonata: Zygoptera: Lestidae)
from peninsular India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 12(10): 16392–16395. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5834.12.10.16392-16395
Sharma, G.,
R. Sundararaj & L.R. Karibasvaraja
(2007). Species
diversity of Odonata in the selected provenances of sandal in Southern India. Zoo’s
Print 22(7): 2765–2767.
Subramanian,
K.A. (2011). Idionyx periyashola. The
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2011: e.T175193A7120124. Downloaded on
26 April 2022. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2011-1.RLTS.T175193A7120124.en
Subramanian,
K.A. & R. Babu (2017). A checklist of Odonata (Insecta) of India. Version 3.0. pp 1–51. Accessed on 20
April 2022.
https://zsi.gov.in/WriteReadData/userfiles/file/Checklist/Odonata%20V3.pdf
Subramanian,
K.A., K.G. Emiliyamma, R. Babu,
C. Radhakrishnan & S.S. Talmale (2018). Atlas of Odonata (Insecta) of Western Ghats, India. Zoological Survey of
India, Kolkata.
Ueda, K. (2021). iNaturalist
Research-grade Observations. iNaturalist.org. Occurrence dataset
https://doi.org/10.15468/ab3s5x accessed via GBIF.org on 27 October 2021. https://www.gbif.org/occurrence/2465188586