Amphibians have long been model organisms for developmental biology [1]. Amphibians are cold-blooded animals that can be found all over the earth, with the exception of the poles [2]. About 24 species of Amphibians have been identified in Pakistan. Saira, Mohammad and Aqsa (2020) were documented 9 species of amphibians from District Haripur. Amphibians are the world's most endangered animals, particularly vulnerable to human predation, fungal illness, and habitat degradation. Extinct or almost extinct frogs, toads, salamanders, and caecilians since the 1800s. The extinct species of amphibians are Golden Toad, Sri Lanka Shrub Frog, Harlequin Toad, Yunnan Lake Newt, Ainsworth's Salamander, Indian Caecilian, Southern Gastric-Brooding Frog, Australian Torrent Frog, Vegas Valley Leopard Frog, Günther's Streamlined Frog [3].

Amphibians are bioindicators, an important component of a healthy ecosystem, and an important component of the food pyramid. They help to maintain the food web's balance by eating a variety of insects and providing food for a variety of avian and mammalian species. Furthermore, they recycle nutrients from aquatic to terrestrial environments, and removing these creatures from any ecosystem will disrupt predator Prey dynamics, invertebrate populations, leaf litter decompositions, nutrient cycling and algae communities, but their population is rapidly dwindling due to a variety of anthropogenic activities [4,5].

Overgrazing, harvesting, deforestation, soil erosion, desertification, invasive species, and chemical contamination all contribute to biodiversity loss and degradation [6-10].

Study Area

The research was carried out in the District Haripur in the Pakistan province of KPK. Haripur is bordered to the west by Swabi and Buner. It is 65 kilometres north of Islamabad and 35 kilometres south of Abbottabad. It is located at a height of 520 metres in a hilly plain area with the following coordinates: 33.9946° N, 72.9106° E, and hilly landscapes with grasses and pine trees.

Study was carried out from February, 2022 to June, 2022. For collection of various amphibian species, the study area was divided into three habitat types; Cultivated, Non-cultivated and Road sides.

Collection and Preservation

A total of 30 field surveys were carried out over a 5 month period. Observations and collections were done at night and during the day to optimize the documenting of the Amphibians. Walking slowly during the day, thoroughly inspecting sunny sections of habitat, softly sifting through leaf litter, and turning over logs, boulders, and rock cervices were all part of the diurnal search. When amphibians were seen, the lowest available taxon was used to identify them; the number of individuals were counted. The animals were photographed when seen. During the survey direct and indirect methods were used and preserved them in 70% ethanol.

 Labelling

We identified specimens to species level using identification keys of [11-13] for identification of amphibians and labelled with their scientific names and location of collection.

Figure 3.2: Collection, Identification and Preservation of Specimen’s.

Data was subject to MS Excel and percentage (%), average, mean and species abundance was find out. The species diversity was find out by using Simpson Diversity Index (SDI).

During the present study 93 specimen were collected. Upon identification, it revealed 15 amphibians were identified out of which, 48 frog specimen were collected which representing 3 genera 2 families. The families were Ranidae and hylidae and 45 toad specimens were collected. Upon identification, it revealed 11 species, 6 genera and 1 family. The family was bufonidae.

Family: Ranidae

Genus: Lithobates

Lithobates blairi [14]

Remarks

In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Panian, Sarisaleh and Lalor.

Family: Hylidae

Genus: Hyla

Hyla squirella (Daudin, 1800)

Remarks

In current study it has been collected from Bakka, Parhala, Sikandarpur and Dehri road.

Family:      Hylidae 

Genus: Pseudacris

 Pseudacris crucifer (Wied-Neuwied, 1838)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Kacchi, Melam, Teer and Dehri road.

Family:      Hylidae

Genus:       Hyla

Hyla versicolar  (Le Conte, 1825)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Panian, Sikandarpur and Dehri road.

Family: Bufonidae

 Genus: Anaxyrus

 Anaxyrus speciosus [15]

Remarks        

 In current study it has been collected from Bakka, Panian, Kachi and parhala.

Family: Bufonidaess

Genus: Incilius

 Incilius mazatlanensis [16]

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Dobandi, and Kagg.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Duttaphrynus

Duttaphrynus melanostictus (Schneider, 1799)

Remarks

In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Dehri road, Sarisaleh and Bakka.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Rhaebo

 Rhaebo haematiticus (Cope, 1862)

Remarks

In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Perhala, Kachi and Bakka.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Bufo

  Bufo bufo (Linnaeus, 1758)

Remarks              

 In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Dobandi, and Sikandarpur.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Anaxyrus

Anaxyrus cognatus (Say, 1822)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Dobandi, and Doyian Khushki.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Rhinella

Rhinella arenarum (Hensel, 1867)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Bakka, Panian, Doyian Khushki.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Rhinella

Rhinella marina (Linnaeus, 1758)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Bakka, Panian, Kachi and parhala.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Anaxyrus

Anaxyrus americanus (Holbrook, 1836)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Teer, Panian, Doyian Khushki and parhala.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Incilius

Inicilus alvarius (Girard, 1859)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Teer, Doyian Khushki and parhala.

Family: Bufonidae

Genus: Inicilus

Inicilus occidentalis (Camerano, 1879)

Remarks        

In current study it has been collected from Dendha, Dobandi, and Sikandarpur

Diversity of amphibian’s species of present study were also reported by [14] from prairie meshlands, constructed wetlands, Illinois, Oklahoma and Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, New Maxico and Lancaster [17] due to same climate and habiate. Nia et al recorded from Wonosobo because of the suitable habitate and [15] from Oklahoma because of the environment and awareness of the people regarded to the animals, [18,19] from United States, North America, Arkansas, Oaklahoma and East Manitoba, [20] in Pakistan and Indonesia and from institut teknologi sumatera. Our present study reported that frog diversity were high in cultivated area that is also proved by [11,20] in Pakistan and Indonesia and Ghana but  reported that amphibian’s species richness were high in river area in district Kasur and Wonosobo because these area are agricultural and have rivers.

Checklist of Amphibians in and around areas of District Haripur

a: Lithobates blairi (Plains leopard), b: Hyla squirella (Squirrel tree frog), c: Pseudacris crucifer (Spring peeper), d: Hyla versicolar (Gray tree frog),  e: Anaxyrus speciosus (Western toad), f: Incilius mazatlanensis (Sinaloa toad), g: Duttaphrynus melanostictus (Asian common toad), h: Rhaebo haematiticus (Truando Toad), I:  Bufo bufo Common toad), j: Anaxyrus cognatus (Plains Toad), k: Rhinella arenarum (Argentine common toad), l: Rhinella marina (Cane toad), m: Anaxyrus americanus (American toad), n: Inicilus alvarius (Colorado River toad), n: Inicilus occidentalis (Pine Toad), o: Inicilus occidentalis (Pine).

        Graph 1: Localities of amphibians in and around the area of district Haripur.

       Graph 2:   Specie abundance of amphibians in and around the area of district Haripur.

During the present study 93 specimen were collected, 37 species of amphibians were identified. In the present research, administration area and in and around areas of Haripur showed least amphibian’s species as compared to the residential area because species composition and abundance is always dependent upon maintenance of natural habitat. Another reason is shortage of time, i.e., survey was carried out only for 4 months. If survey was done for long time there would have been a substantial increase in number of species. In the present study, the highest number of amphibian’s species was collected from cultivated areas. The main reason behind this were probably due to the urbanization, deforestation and reproduction and varities of amphibian’s species is look less in number.

The author is greatly acknowledged the Departments of Biology University of Haripur, GDC No 2Haripur and Arid University for providing experimental facilities.

All the authors confirmed that the content of this manuscript has no conflict of interest.

1. Gurdon JB, Hopwood N. The introduction of Xenopus laevis into developmental biology: of empire, pregnancy testing and ribosomal genes. Int J Dev Biol. 2000; 44: 43-50.
2. Zug GR, Vitt LJ, Caldwell JP. Herpetology: an introductory biology of amphibians and reptiles. 2001;1-527.
3. Bob S. Animal and nature. 2019.
4. Petrov BP. The herpetofauna (Amphibia and Reptilia) of the Eastern Rhodopes (Bulgaria and Greece). Pensoft and Nat. Mus. Natur. Hist. Sofia. 2004; 863-879.
5. Baig KJ, Awan MR, Ashraf N. Ecological studies and zoogeographic affinities of the amphibians and reptiles found in Chagai Desert, Balochistan, Pakistan. Pakistan J Zool. 2006; 38: 145-151.
6. Gibbons JW, Semlitsch RD. Terrestrial drift fences with pitfall traps an effective technique for quantitative sampling of animal populations. Brimleyana. 2000; 7: 1-16.
7. Blaustein RA, Romansic JM, Kiesecker JM, Hatch AC. Ultraviolet radiation, toxic chemicals and amphibian population decline. Diversity and Distributions. 2003; 123-140.
8. Boone MD, Semlitsch RD, Fairchild JF, Rothermel BB. Effects of pesticides on Amphibians in Large-Scale Experimental Ponds. Ecological Applications. 2004; 14: 685-691.
9. Bridges CM. Predator-prey interactions between two amphibian species: Effects of insecticide exposure. AE. 1999; 33: 205-211.
10. Bridges CM. Long-term effects of pesticides exposure at various life stages of Southern leopard frog (Ranasphenocephala). AECT. 2000; 39: 91-96.
11. Khan MS, Mirza MR. An annotated checklist and keys to the reptiles of Pakistan. Biologioa. 1997; 23: 41- 64.
12. Powell R, Crombie RI, Boos HEA. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles (Hemidactylus mabouia). 1998.
13. George RZ, Jens JV, Michelle K. Burmese Hemidactylus (Reptilia, Squamata, Gekkonidae): Taxonomic Notes on Tropical Asian Hemidactylus. 2007; 58: 387-405.
14. Mecham, Littlejohn, Oldham, Brown & Brown, 1973. Rana blairi, The Integrated Taxonomic Information System, GBIF Backbone Taxonomy. Checklist data base. 2011.
15. Amphibnian species of the world. American Museum of Natural History. 1854.
16. Taylor P. An observation on the feeding habits of lycodonomorphus rufulus. J. Herptol.Associ. Africa. 2010; 6: 1970.
17. Shelby K. Herpetofaunal Diversity at Yankee Hill State Lake and Wildlife Management Area, Lancaster County, Nebraska. 2011.
18. Schmidt KP. A Checklist of North American Amphibians and Reptiles. 1953.
19. Cook FR. Introduction to Canadian Amphibians and Reptiles. National Museums of Canada, Ottawa, Canada. 1984.
20. Dian S, Zico FR. The herpetofauna around human settlements in Lubuklinggau City, South Sumatra, Indonesia: Composition and diversity. Biodiversity journal. 2020; 21: 1432-1437.
21. Arnold N, Ovenden D. Reptiles and Amphibians of Britain and Europe. Anaxyrus cognatus (Animal Diversity). 2002; 73-74.
22. Bartlett RD, Bartlett PP. Guide and Reference to the Snakes of Eastern and Central North America (North of Mexico). 2005.
23. Beane JC, Braswell AL, Mitchell JC, Palmer WM, Harrison JR. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia, 2^nd CH. 2010; 274.
24. Bonin F, Devaux B, Dupre A. Turtles of the World. Baltimore. 2006; 416.
25. Cesar C, Hanno S, Phillip C, Pablo GD, Bernd L, Mang T, et al. Diversity, biogeography and the global flows of alien amphibians and reptiles. 2017; 23: 1313-1322.
26. Chandra B, Lani S. Assam Science Technology and Environment Council. 2016.
27. Conant R, Collins JT. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians. Eastern and Central North America. Boston. 1998: 616.
28. Craig J. Malpolon monspessulanus Hermann, Venter Institute. 1804.
29. Dickerson M. The Frog. NY: Doubleday, Page and Company. 1906.
30. Nneji LM, Adeola AC, Okeyoyin A, Oladipo OC, Saidu Y, Samuel D, et al. Diversity and distribution of amphibians and reptiles in Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria. Herpetology Notes. 2019; 12: 543-559.
31. O’Rourke DP, Rosenbaum MD. Laboratory Animal Medicine. 2015: 931-965.
32. Montes E, Feriche M, Ruiz-Sueiro L, Alaminos E, Pleguezuelos JM. Reproduction ecology of the recently invasive snake Hemorrhois hippocrepis on the island of Ibiza. Curr Zool. 2020; 66: 363-371.
33. Ernst CH, Ernst EM. Snakes of the United States and Canada. Washington and London: Smithsonian Books. 2003.
34. Ernst CH, Lovich JE. Turtles of the United States and Canada. Balt J. 2009: 827.
35. Franziska S. Amphibia’s web data base.University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA. 2001.
36. Frost DR. Rhaebo haematiticus Cope, 1862. Amphibian Species of the American Museum of Natural History. 2015.
37. Frost DR. Amphibian Species of the World. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. 2016.
38. Frost DR. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0. American Museum of Natural History. 2017.
39. Gelb J. Duttaphrynus melanostictus, Animal Diversity Web. 2013.
40. Hammerson G. "Thamnophis cyrtopsis" (On-line). IUCN Red List of Threatened. 2012.
41. Harding JM, Mifsud DA. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Great Lakes Region. 1997.
42. Holtfreter J, Hamburger V. Amphibians. In: Willier BH, Weiss PA, Hamburger V, eds. Analysis of Development. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company. 1955; 230-296.
43. IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group. "Rhaebo haematiticus". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2020.
44. Jensen JB, Camp CD, Gibbons W, Elliott M. Amphibians and Reptiles of Georgia. The University of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. 2008.
45. Sarwar MK, Malik MF, Hussain M, Azam I, Iqbal W, Ashiq U. Distribution and current status of amphibian fauna of Pakistan. eJBio. 2016; 12: 243-246.
46. Krysko KL, Daniels KJ. A Key to the Geckos (Sauria: Gekkonidae) of Florida. Caribb J Sci. 2005; 41: 28-36.
47. Khan MS. Amphibions and reptiles of Pakistan. 2000: 1-138.
48. Kyle JK, Alexander GJ, Du Preez LH. Habitat associations, reproduction, and geographical distribution of Lycodonomorphus obscuriventris (Serpentes: Lamprophiidae). Herpetology Notes. 2021; 14: 865-867.
49. Rollins LA, Richardson MF, Shine R. A genetic perspective on rapid evolution in cane toads (Rhinella marina). Molecular Biology. 2015; 24: 2264-2276.
50. Lettie G. Rhaebo haematiticus. University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA, AmphibiaWeb. 2009.
51. Schnurr LA. Amphibian and Reptile Diversity Distributions in a Complex, Human-Dominated Lanscape. 2006.
52. Matthew RM. Evaluating Conservation Strategies for a Threatened Population of Gray Ratsnakes (Pantherophis Spiloides). 2020.
53. Masood MF, Ahmed AA. Ecological studies on diversity of Herpetofauna in Asir region, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Egypt Acad J Biolog Sci. 2012; 4: 143-163.
54. Oliver JA. The National History of North American Amphibians and Reptiles. 1955.
55. Patil GP, Talllie C. Diversity as a concent and its measurement. Trans. North. Amer. Wildl. Nat. Resour. 1982; 39: 334-353.
56. Rasika R, Kerry GK, Gad P, Michael F. Urban Amphibians of the Texas Panhandle: Baseline Inventory and Habitat Associations in a Drought Year. IRCF. 2012; 19: 243-253.
57. Tingley R, Shine R. Desiccation Risk Drives the Spatial Ecology of an Invasive Anuran (Rhinella marina) in the Australian Semi-Desert. PLOS ONE. 2011.
58. Robinson A. Amphiba web. 2001.
59. Rohini Bl K, Praveen, K. Elseviers. 2010; 57: 459-465.
60. Bibi S, Khan MF, Rehman A. An Annotated Checklist of Herpeto Fauna of District Haripur, KPK, Pakistan. 2020; 9.
61. Saqib Y, Shafiullah G, Hameed Ur Rehman, Faisal J, Wali MA, Shagufta S, et al. Zoological fauna of Khurum Dam and Muhabbat Khel Dam of district Karak, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. J Entomol Zool Stud. 2017; 25: 380-387.
62. Abdelfatah S, Lu X, Guillermo S-H. Cytotoxicity and antimitotic activity of Rhinella schneideri and Rhinella marina venoms. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2019; 242. 112049.Saira B, Muhammad FK, Aqsa R. An Annotated Checklist of Herpeto Fauna of District Haripur, KPK, Pakistan. 2020; 9.
63. Saqib Y, Shafiullah G, Hameed Ur Rehman, Faisal J, Wali MA, Shagufta S, Khalid U. and Zawar A. Zoological fauna of Khurum Dam and Muhabbat Khel Dam of district Karak, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2017; 25: 380-387.                                                                        
64. Sara, Abdelfatah, Xiaohua L, Guillermo SH. Cytotoxicity and antimitotic activity of Rhinella schneideri and Rhinella marina venoms. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2019; 242.
65. Sarah N. AmphibiaWeb 2021 Rhinella marina: Marine Toad. 2001.
66. Sergius LK, John, C. AmphibiaWeb 2022 Bufo bufoEasteal, S. (1963). 'Bufo marinus.Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles. ASIH. 1999; 395: 1-395.4.
67. Sharif MK. Checklist of Amphibians of Pakistan. Pakistan J. Wildl. 2010; 1: 37-42.
68. Sperry JC Taylor. Habitat use and seasonal activity of the Great Plains ratsnake in central Texas. Southwest. Nat, 2008; 53: 444-449.
69. Stebbins, R. Peterson Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Boston. 1985; 30: 915-928.
70. Stebbins R. 1985. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Stumpel, A.H.P. (2004). Reptiles and amphibians.
71. Stebbins R. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Stumpel, A.H.P. Reptiles and amphibians. 2003.
72. Ulmar TG. Costs and benefits of mate choice in the lek-breeding reed frog, Hyperolius marmoratus. Anim. Behav, 1997; 53: 1103-1117.
73. Virden T. Hyla squirella (On-line), Animal Diversity Web. 2003.
74. Walder R. Another Non-native Species Found in West Marin's Creeks. 2004.
75. Walter EM, Samuel D, Jeff B, Avery AW. Status and Geographic Expansion of the Mediterranean Gecko, Hemidactylus Turcicus, in Louisiana: implications for the Southeastern Snited states. Herpetol. Conserv. Biol. 2006; 1: 45-50.
76. Webb RG. Trionyx spiniferus. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles. 1973; 140: 1-4.
77. Wright A. The Handbook of Snakes. Wetlands. 1957; 30: 915-928.