macrovipera schweizeri is a venomous viper species found in greece on the islands of the cyclades archipelago in the aegean sea .

no subspecies are currently recognized .

macrovipera schweizeri

macrovipera schweizeri <EOT> macrovipera deserti was previously considered a subspecies of vipera mauritanica , macrovipera schweizeri as a subspecies of vipera lebetina .

rare cb milos viper ( macrovipera schweizeri 0 . 1 ) fast strike on rat video

rare cb milos viper ( macrovipera schweizeri 0 . 1 ) fast strike on rat video - youtube

2 ) identifying threats to macrovipera l . lebetina on cyprus and comparing them with the threats to the endangered macrovipera schweizeri on the island of milos , and to other large vipers of semi - arid area ,

embed this arkive thumbnail link ( " portlet " ) by copying and pasting the code below . < a href = " urltoken " title = " arkive species - cyclades blunt - nosed viper ( macrovipera schweizeri ) " > < img src = " urltoken " alt = " arkive species - cyclades blunt - nosed viper ( macrovipera schweizeri ) " title = " arkive species - cyclades blunt - nosed viper ( macrovipera schweizeri ) " border = " 0 " / > < / a >

the cyclades viper ( macrovipera swiss ) , also known as milosotter , is an aegean viper from the kind of large - scale vipers ( macrovipera ) .

the cyclades viper was first in 1935 by the austrian herpetologists franz werner as a subspecies of the levant viper ( macrovipera lebetina ) described and long recognized as such . the classification of macrovipera swiss in the subspecies macrovipera swiss swiss and swiss macrovipera siphnensis is up for discussion , but is currently still questionable as far genetic studies are lacking .

macrovipera schweizeri , commonly named milos viper or cyclades blunt - nosed viper , is a venomous snake . it can be found only on four greece islands : milos , kimolos , polinos and siphnos .

mertens , r . 1955 . der typus von vipera lebetina schweizeri . senckenbergiana biologica 36 : 297 - 299 .

( 2000 ) suggest assigning the species vipera ( = macrovipera ) mauritanica , vipera ( = macrovipera ) deserti and vipera palaestinae to the genus daboia , together with russell ' s viper .

map 50 macrovipera spp . , as well as asian and north african species of the genus vipera sp .

coluber lebetinus linnaeus 1758 : 218 vipera lebetina — wall 1908 : 804 vipera lebetina — smith 1943 : 486 vipera xanthina ( gray 1849 ) fide khalikov ( pers . comm . ) vipera mauritanica ( gray 1849 ) fide khalikov ( pers . comm . ) vipera euphratica — boettger 1880 : 167 vipera euphratica — boulenger 1887 : 345 daboia lebetina — engelmann et al 1993 macrovipera lebetina — mcdiarmid , campbell & touré 1999 : 383 vipera lebetina — sharma 2004 macrovipera lebetina — kwet & trapp 2015 macrovipera lebetina — wallach et al . 2014 : 421 macrovipera lebetina cernovi ( chikin & szczerbak 1992 ) macrovipera lebetina cernovi — davletbakov et al . 2016 macrovipera lebetina lebetina ( linnaeus 1758 ) coluber lebetinus linnaeus 1758 macrovipera lebetina cypriensis reuss 1933 vipera lebetina euphratica — schmidt 1939 vipera lebetina lebetina — harding & welch 1980 vipera lebetina lebetina — welch 1994 : 73 daboia lebetina lebetina — obst 1983 : 232 macrovipera lebetina lebetina — golay et al . 1993 macrovipera lebetina obtusa ( dwigubsky 1832 ) vipera obtusa dwigubsky 1832 : 30 vipera euphratica martin 1838 vipera peilei murray 1892 vipera lebetina boulenger 1920 vipera lebetina peilei — schwarz 1936 : 244 vipera lebetina euphratica schmidt 1939 vipera lebetina obtusa — mertens & wermuth 1960 vipera lebetina euphratica — haas & werner 1969 vipera lebetina obtusa — harding & welch 1980 daboia lebetina obtusa — herrman , joger & nilson 1989 daboia lebetina obtusa — engelmann et al 1993 macrovipera lebetina obtusa — golay et al . 1993 vipera lebetina obtusa — welch 1994 : 121 vipera lebetina obtusa — frynta et al . 1997 macrovipera lebetina obtusa — schweiger 2009 macrovipera lebetina obtusa — iskenderov 2013 macrovipera lebetina transmediterranea ( nilson & andrén 1988 ) vipera lebetina transmediterranea nilson & andrén 1988 macrovipera lebetina transmediterranea — golay et al . 1993 vipera lebetina transmediterranea — welch 1994 : 121 daboia lebetina transmediterranea macrovipera lebetina transmediterranea — kucharzewski 2011 macrovipera lebetina turanica ( chernov 1940 ) vipera lebetina turanica chernov 1940 vipera lebetina turanica — harding & welch 1980 daboia lebetina turanica — obst 1983 : 232 macrovipera lebetina turanica — golay et al . 1993 macrovipera lebetina turanica — laita 2013 macrovipera lebetina turanica — davletbakov et al . 2016

4 ) providing and discussing recommendations for the conservation of cypriot populations of macrovipera l . lebetina and its habitats .

photo of a milos viper , macrovipera schweizeri , which is a highly venomous viper endemic to the milos island group . its closest relatives are found in north africa and the eastern mediterranean . it is highly prized by reptile collectors , especially in its red form .

my first ever video of my snakes . this is my female milos viper ( macrovipera schweizeri ) striking on a rat . . . sorry for any mistakes , resolution etc ( see video description for more ) . hope you enjoy the video , thanks for watching !

my first ever video of my snakes . this is my female milos viper ( macrovipera schweizeri ) striking on a rat . . . sorry for any mistakes , resolution etc ( see video description for more ) . hope you enjoy the video , thanks for watching ! urltoken

nilson , g . , andren , c . , ioannidis , y . & dimaki , m . ( 1999 ) ecology and conservation of the milos viper , macrovipera schweizeri ( werner , 1935 ) . amphibia - reptilia , 20 ( 4 ) : 355 – 375 . available at : urltoken

nilson , g . , andren , c . , ioannidis , y . and dimaki , m . ( 1999 ) ecology and conservation of the milos viper , macrovipera schweizeri ( werner , 1935 ) . amphibia - reptilia , 20 ( 4 ) : 355 - 375 . available at : urltoken

the blunt - nosed viper ( macrovipera lebetina ) is composed of seven subspecies which inhabit semi - arid environments in north africa and in the near and middle east ( irano - turanian region ) . the nominate subspecies macrovipera lebetina lebetina is restricted to cyprus ( and possibly some localities in southeastern turkey ) . cyprus is home to 11 snake species , of which macrovipera lebetina is the only venomous one .

the species vipera lebetina and vipera mauritanica and their subspecies , formerly assigned to the genus vipera , are now included in the genus macrovipera .

hellebuyck , tom 2016 . picture : milos viper ( macrovipera lebetina ) . litteratura serpentium 36 ( 3 ) : 110 - get paper here

zwinenberg , a . j . 1979 . biologie en status van de levantijnse adden van de cycladen , vipera lebetina schweizeri . lacerta 9 : 138 - 146 . - get paper here

gál , j . , tóth , t . , molnár , v . , marosán , m . and sós , e . ( 2005 ) mass incidence of gout in a breeding colony of milos vipers ( macrovipera schweizeri ) . magyar allatorvosok lapja ( hungarian veterinary journal ) , 2005 : 551 - 556 . available at : urltoken

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ aspidelaps l . lubricus 1 . 1 , agkistrodon b . bilineatus 0 . 1 , macrovipera schweizeri 0 . 1 , morelia spilota variegata 0 . 1 , pantherophis guttatus 1 . 0 check out my youtube channel and watch my snake videos - - - > urltoken

jestrzemski , daniel 2015 . feldstudie zur zypriotischen levanteotter ( macrovipera lebetina lebetina ) . terraria - elaphe 2015 ( 1 ) : 54 - 57 [ 2014 ] - get paper here

gumprecht , a . & u . lauten 1997 . zur fortpflanzung und haltung der levante - otter macrovipera lebetina lebetina . sauria 19 ( 1 ) : 39 - 43 - get paper here

m . lebetina and m . schweizeri in shades of grey or brown , with rectangles or a rectangular zig - zag pattern along the body ; sometimes the markings are barely visible . m . mauritanica in shades of brown with a zig - zag or wavy band .

kamelin , eugeny r . , yuri a . lukin , and konstantin d . milto 1997 . hybridization of vipera schweizeri ( werner , 1935 ) and vipera lebetina obtusa , dvigubsky 1832 . russ . j . herpetol . 4 ( 1 ) : 75 - 78 - get paper here

kabisch , k . & wiedl , h . j . 2009 . zur levanteotter , macrovipera lebetina lebetina ( linnaeus , 1758 ) auf zypern . sauria 30 ( 4 ) : 29 - 36 [ 2008 ] - get paper here

sanz , l . ; ayvazyan , n . ; calvete , j . j . 2008 . snake venomics of the armenian mountain vipers macrovipera lebetina obtusa and vipera raddei . journal of proteomics 71 ( 2 ) : 198 - 209 .

tok , c . v . , d . cihan & d . ayaz 2002 . a new record of macrovipera lebetina obtusa ( viperidae ) from south - eastern anatolia . zoology in the middle east 25 : 23 - get paper here

data about microvipera schweizeri viper occurence is based on the information from wikipedia page [ 1 ] . the data are divided into two indicators : [ 1 ] - risk region [ 0 ] - secure region . the data was created based on the maps and descriptions from the corresponding wikipedia‚äôs websites . ( see data access and policies ) .

moradi , naeim ; nasrullah rastegar - pouyani , eskandar rastegar - pouyani 2014 . geographic variation in the morphology of macrovipera lebetina ( linnaeus , 1758 ) ( ophidia : viperidae ) in iran . acta herpetologica 9 ( 2 ) : 187 - 202 - get paper here

al oran , r . m . , rostum , s . , joger , u . & z . amr . 1998 . first record of the levantine viper , macrovipera lebetina , from jordan . zoology in the middle east 16 : 65 - 70 - get paper here

coşkun , yüksel ; mahmut coşkun , mario schweiger 2011 . new locality records of blunt - nosed viper , macrovipera lebetina obtusa in central anatolia , turkey ( serpentes : viperidae ) . fen bilimleri dergisi , cilt 32 ( 2 ) : 22 - 28 - get paper here

the genus macrovipera contains large snakes that are responsible for a number of bites in western asia and north africa each year ( mallow and nilson 2003 ) . the members of this genus can be ill - tempered and dangerous . bites are painful and a great deal of venom can be injected .

herrmann , h . w . ; joger , u . & nilson , g . 1992 . phylogeny and systematics of viperine snakes . iii . : resurrection of the genus macrovipera ( reuss , 1927 ) as suggested by biochemical evidence . amphibia - reptilia 13 : 375 - 392 - get paper here

mermer , ahmet ; bayram göçmen and kerim çi̇çek 2012 . extreme cases of colour pattern and size in levantine viper , macrovipera lebetina ( l . , 1758 ) from the west of euphrates basin ( southern anatolia , turkey ) . biharean biologist 6 ( 1 ) : 70 - 71 - get paper here

gocmen , bayram ; arikan , huseyin ; mermer , ahmet ; langerwerf , bert ; hahar , hasan 2006 . morphological , hemipenial and venom electrophoresis comparisons of the levantine viper , macrovipera lebetina ( linnaeus , 1758 ) , from cyprus and southern anatolia . turkish journal of zoology 30 : 225 - 234 - get paper here

göçmen , b . ; arikan , h . ; cicek , k . & yildiz , z . 2007 . a serological comparison of the populations of the levantine viper , macrovipera lebetina ( linnaeus , 1758 ) in cyprus and southern turkey . north - western journal of zoology 3 ( 2 ) : 75 - 80 - get paper here

mebert , konrad ; bayram göçmen , naşi̇t i̇ğci̇ , mehmet anil oğuz , mert kariş & sylvain ursenbacher 2015 . new records and search for contact zones among parapatric vipers in the genus vipera ( barani , kaznakovi , darevskii , eriwanensis ) , montivipera ( wagneri , raddei ) , and macrovipera ( lebetina ) in northeastern anatolia herpetological bulletin ( 133 ) - get paper here

garrigues , thomas ; catherine dauga ; elisabeth ferquel ; valérie choumet and anna - bella failloux 2005 . molecular phylogeny of vipera laurenti , 1768 and the related genera macrovipera ( reuss , 1927 ) and daboia ( gray , 1842 ) , with comments about neurotoxic vipera aspis aspis populations . molecular phylogenetics and evolution < br / > volume 35 ( 1 ) : 35 - 47 - get paper here

html public " - / / w3c / / dtd xhtml 1 . 0 strict / / en " " urltoken "

thank you for taking the time to provide feedback on the iucn red list of threatened species website , we are grateful for your input .

home » resources » categories and criteria » 2001 iucn red list categories and criteria version 3 . 1

see below for the rules and requirements outlined in the iucn red list categories and criteria . version 3 . 1 ( second edition ) . for translations of this document into other languages , click here .

the iucn red list categories and criteria are intended to be an easily and widely understood system for classifying species at high risk of global extinction . the general aim of the system is to provide an explicit , objective framework for the classification of the broadest range of species according to their extinction risk . however , while the red list may focus attention on those taxa at the highest risk , it is not the sole means of setting priorities for conservation measures for their protection .

extensive consultation and testing in the development of the system strongly suggest that it is robust across most organisms . however , it should be noted that although the system places species into the threatened categories with a high degree of consistency , the criteria do not take into account the life histories of every species . hence , in certain individual cases , the risk of extinction may be under - or over - estimated .

before 1994 the more subjective threatened species categories used in iucn red data books and red lists had been in place , with some modification , for almost 30 years . although the need to revise the categories had long been recognized ( fitter and fitter 1987 ) , the current phase of development only began in 1989 following a request from the iucn species survival commission ( ssc ) steering committee to develop a more objective approach . the iucn council adopted the new red list system in 1994 .

to give people using threatened species lists a better understanding of how individual species were classified .

since their adoption by iucn council in 1994 , the iucn red list categories have become widely recognized internationally , and they are now used in a range of publications and listings produced by iucn , as well as by numerous governmental and non - governmental organizations . such broad and extensive use revealed the need for a number of improvements , and ssc was mandated by the 1996 world conservation congress ( wcc res . 1 . 4 ) to conduct a review of the system ( iucn 1996 ) . this document presents the revisions accepted by the iucn council .

the proposals presented in this document result from a continuing process of drafting , consultation and validation . the production of a large number of draft proposals has led to some confusion , especially as each draft has been used for classifying some set of species for conservation purposes . to clarify matters , and to open the way for modifications as and when they become necessary , a system for version numbering has been adopted as follows :

version 1 . 0 : mace and lande ( 1991 ) the first paper discussing a new basis for the categories , and presenting numerical criteria especially relevant for large vertebrates .

version 2 . 0 : mace et al . ( 1992 ) a major revision of version 1 . 0 , including numerical criteria appropriate to all organisms and introducing the non - threatened categories .

version 2 . 1 : iucn ( 1993 ) following an extensive consultation process within ssc , a number of changes were made to the details of the criteria , and fuller explanation of basic principles was included . a more explicit structure clarified the significance of the non - threatened categories .

version 2 . 2 : mace and stuart ( 1994 ) following further comments received and additional validation exercises , some minor changes to the criteria were made . in addition , the susceptible category present in versions 2 . 0 and 2 . 1 was subsumed into the vulnerable category . a precautionary application of the system was emphasised .

version 2 . 3 : iucn ( 1994 ) iucn council adopted this version , which incorporated changes as a result of comments from iucn members , in december 1994 . the initial version of this document was published without the necessary bibliographic details , such as date of publication and isbn number , but these were included in the subsequent reprints in 1998 and 1999 . this version was used for the 1996 iucn red list of threatened animals ( baillie and groombridge 1996 ) , the world list of threatened trees ( oldfield et al 1998 ) and the 2000 iucn red list of threatened species ( hilton - taylor 2000 ) .

version 3 . 0 : iucn / ssc criteria review working group ( 1999 ) following comments received , a series of workshops were convened to look at the iucn red list criteria following which , changes were proposed affecting the criteria , the definitions of some key terms and the handling of uncertainty .

version 3 . 1 : iucn ( 2001 ) the iucn council adopted this latest version , which incorporated changes as a result of comments from the iucn and ssc memberships and from a final meeting of the criteria review working group , in february 2000 .

all new assessments from january 2001 should use the latest adopted version and cite the year of publication and version number .

in the rest of this document , the proposed system is outlined in several sections . section ii , the preamble , presents basic information about the context and structure of the system , and the procedures that are to be followed in applying the criteria to species . section iii provides definitions of key terms used . section iv presents the categories , while section v details the quantitative criteria used for classification within the threatened categories . annex i provides guidance on how to deal with uncertainty when applying the criteria ; annex ii suggests a standard format for citing the red list categories and criteria ; and annex iii outlines the documentation requirements for taxa to be included on iucn ' s global red lists . it is important for the effective functioning of the system that all sections are read and understood to ensure that the definitions and rules are followed .

the information in this section is intended to direct and facilitate the use and interpretation of the categories ( critically endangered , endangered , etc . ) , criteria ( a to e ) , and subcriteria ( 1 , 2 , etc . ; a , b , etc . ; i , ii , etc . ) .

extinction is a chance process . thus , a listing in a higher extinction risk category implies a higher expectation of extinction , and over the time - frames specified more taxa listed in a higher category are expected to go extinct than those in a lower one ( without effective conservation action ) . however , the persistence of some taxa in high - risk categories does not necessarily mean their initial assessment was inaccurate .

all taxa listed as critically endangered qualify for vulnerable and endangered , and all listed as endangered qualify for vulnerable . together these categories are described as ' threatened ' . the threatened categories form a part of the overall scheme . it will be possible to place all taxa into one of the categories ( see figure 1 ) .

for listing as critically endangered , endangered or vulnerable there is a range of quantitative criteria ; meeting any one of these criteria qualifies a taxon for listing at that level of threat . each taxon should be evaluated against all the criteria . even though some criteria will be inappropriate for certain taxa ( some taxa will never qualify under these however close to extinction they come ) , there should be criteria appropriate for assessing threat levels for any taxon . the relevant factor is whether any one criterion is met , not whether all are appropriate or all are met . because it will never be clear in advance which criteria are appropriate for a particular taxon , each taxon should be evaluated against all the criteria , and all criteria met at the highest threat category must be listed .

the different criteria ( a - e ) are derived from a wide review aimed at detecting risk factors across the broad range of organisms and the diverse life histories they exhibit . the quantitative values presented in the various criteria associated with threatened categories were developed through wide consultation , and they are set at what are generally judged to be appropriate levels , even if no formal justification for these values exists . the levels for different criteria within categories were set independently but against a common standard . broad consistency between them was sought .

the criteria for the threatened categories are to be applied to a taxon whatever the level of conservation action affecting it . it is important to emphasise here that a taxon may require conservation action even if it is not listed as threatened . conservation actions which may benefit the taxon are included as part of the documentation requirements ( see annex 3 ) .

the criteria are clearly quantitative in nature . however , the absence of high - quality data should not deter attempts at applying the criteria , as methods involving estimation , inference and projection are emphasised as being acceptable throughout . inference and projection may be based on extrapolation of current or potential threats into the future ( including their rate of change ) , or of factors related to population abundance or distribution ( including dependence on other taxa ) , so long as these can reasonably be supported . suspected or inferred patterns in the recent past , present or near future can be based on any of a series of related factors , and these factors should be specified as part of the documentation .

taxa at risk from threats posed by future events of low probability but with severe consequences ( catastrophes ) should be identified by the criteria ( e . g . small distributions , few locations ) . some threats need to be identified particularly early , and appropriate actions taken , because their effects are irreversible or nearly so ( e . g . , pathogens , invasive organisms , hybridization ) .

the data used to evaluate taxa against the criteria are often estimated with considerable uncertainty . such uncertainty can arise from any one or all of the following three factors : natural variation , vagueness in the terms and definitions used , and measurement error . the way in which this uncertainty is handled can have a strong influence on the results of an evaluation . details of methods recommended for handling uncertainty are included in annex 1 , and assessors are encouraged to read and follow these principles .

in general , when uncertainty leads to wide variation in the results of assessments , the range of possible outcomes should be specified . a single category must be chosen and the basis for the decision should be documented ; it should be both precautionary and credible .

when data are very uncertain , the category of ' data deficient ' may be assigned . however , in this case the assessor must provide documentation showing that this category has been assigned because data are inadequate to determine a threat category . it is important to recognize that taxa that are poorly known can often be assigned a threat category on the basis of background information concerning the deterioration of their habitat and / or other causal factors ; therefore the liberal use of ' data deficient ' is discouraged .

listing in the categories of not evaluated and data deficient indicates that no assessment of extinction risk has been made , though for different reasons . until such time as an assessment is made , taxa listed in these categories should not be treated as if they were non - threatened . it may be appropriate ( especially for data deficient forms ) to give them the same degree of attention as threatened taxa , at least until their status can be assessed .

all assessments should be documented . threatened classifications should state the criteria and subcriteria that were met . no assessment can be accepted for the iucn red list as valid unless at least one criterion is given . if more than one criterion or subcriterion is met , then each should be listed . if a re - evaluation indicates that the documented criterion is no longer met , this should not result in automatic reassignment to a lower category of threat ( downlisting ) . instead , the taxon should be re - evaluated against all the criteria to clarify its status . the factors responsible for qualifying the taxon against the criteria , especially where inference and projection are used , should be documented ( see annexes 2 and 3 ) . the documentation requirements for other categories are also specified in annex 3 .

the category of threat is not necessarily sufficient to determine priorities for conservation action . the category of threat simply provides an assessment of the extinction risk under current circumstances , whereas a system for assessing priorities for action will include numerous other factors concerning conservation action such as costs , logistics , chances of success , and other biological characteristics of the subject .

re - evaluation of taxa against the criteria should be carried out at appropriate intervals . this is especially important for taxa listed under near threatened , data deficient and for threatened taxa whose status is known or suspected to be deteriorating .

a taxon may be moved from a category of higher threat to a category of lower threat if none of the criteria of the higher category has been met for five years or more .

if the original classification is found to have been erroneous , the taxon may be transferred to the appropriate category or removed from the threatened categories altogether , without delay ( but see point 10 above ) .

the term ' population ' is used in a specific sense in the red list criteria that is different to its common biological usage . population is here defined as the total number of individuals of the taxon . for functional reasons , primarily owing to differences between life forms , population size is measured as numbers of mature individuals only . in the case of taxa obligately dependent on other taxa for all or part of their life cycles , biologically appropriate values for the host taxon should be used .

subpopulations are defined as geographically or otherwise distinct groups in the population between which there is little demographic or genetic exchange ( typically one successful migrant individual or gamete per year or less ) .

the number of mature individuals is the number of individuals known , estimated or inferred to be capable of reproduction . when estimating this quantity , the following points should be borne in mind :

mature individuals that will never produce new recruits should not be counted ( e . g . densities are too low for fertilization ) .

in the case of populations with biased adult or breeding sex ratios , it is appropriate to use lower estimates for the number of mature individuals , which take this into account .

where the population size fluctuates , use a lower estimate . in most cases this will be much less than the mean .

reproducing units within a clone should be counted as individuals , except where such units are unable to survive alone ( e . g . corals ) .

in the case of taxa that naturally lose all or a subset of mature individuals at some point in their life cycle , the estimate should be made at the appropriate time , when mature individuals are available for breeding .

re - introduced individuals must have produced viable offspring before they are counted as mature individuals .

generation length is the average age of parents of the current cohort ( i . e . newborn individuals in the population ) . generation length therefore reflects the turnover rate of breeding individuals in a population . generation length is greater than the age at first breeding and less than the age of the oldest breeding individual , except in taxa that breed only once . where generation length varies under threat , the more natural , i . e . pre - disturbance , generation length should be used .

a reduction is a decline in the number of mature individuals of at least the amount ( % ) stated under the criterion over the time period ( years ) specified , although the decline need not be continuing . a reduction should not be interpreted as part of a fluctuation unless there is good evidence for this . the downward phase of a fluctuation will not normally count as a reduction .

a continuing decline is a recent , current or projected future decline ( which may be smooth , irregular or sporadic ) which is liable to continue unless remedial measures are taken . fluctuations will not normally count as continuing declines , but an observed decline should not be considered as a fluctuation unless there is evidence for this .

extreme fluctuations can be said to occur in a number of taxa when population size or distribution area varies widely , rapidly and frequently , typically with a variation greater than one order of magnitude ( i . e . a tenfold increase or decrease ) .

the phrase ' severely fragmented ' refers to the situation in which increased extinction risk to the taxon results from the fact that most of its individuals are found in small and relatively isolated subpopulations ( in certain circumstances this may be inferred from habitat information ) . these small subpopulations may go extinct , with a reduced probability of recolonization .

extent of occurrence is defined as the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary which can be drawn to encompass all the known , inferred or projected sites of present occurrence of a taxon , excluding cases of vagrancy ( see figure 2 ) . this measure may exclude discontinuities or disjunctions within the overall distributions of taxa ( e . g . large areas of obviously unsuitable habitat ) ( but see ' area of occupancy ' , point 10 below ) . extent of occurrence can often be measured by a minimum convex polygon ( the smallest polygon in which no internal angle exceeds 180 degrees and which contains all the sites of occurrence ) .

figure 2 . two examples of the distinction between extent of occurrence and area of occupancy . ( a ) is the spatial distribution of known , inferred or projected sites of present occurrence . ( b ) shows one possible boundary to the extent of occurrence , which is the measured area within this boundary . ( c ) shows one measure of area of occupancy which can be achieved by the sum of the occupied grid squares .

the term ' location ' defines a geographically or ecologically distinct area in which a single threatening event can rapidly affect all individuals of the taxon present . the size of the location depends on the area covered by the threatening event and may include part of one or many subpopulations . where a taxon is affected by more than one threatening event , location should be defined by considering the most serious plausible threat .

a quantitative analysis is defined here as any form of analysis which estimates the extinction probability of a taxon based on known life history , habitat requirements , threats and any specified management options . population viability analysis ( pva ) is one such technique . quantitative analyses should make full use of all relevant available data . in a situation in which there is limited information , such data as are available can be used to provide an estimate of extinction risk ( for instance , estimating the impact of stochastic events on habitat ) . in presenting the results of quantitative analyses , the assumptions ( which must be appropriate and defensible ) , the data used and the uncertainty in the data or quantitative model must be documented .

extinct ( ex ) a taxon is extinct when there is no reasonable doubt that the last individual has died . a taxon is presumed extinct when exhaustive surveys in known and / or expected habitat , at appropriate times ( diurnal , seasonal , annual ) , throughout its historic range have failed to record an individual . surveys should be over a time frame appropriate to the taxon ' s life cycle and life form .

extinct in the wild ( ew ) a taxon is extinct in the wild when it is known only to survive in cultivation , in captivity or as a naturalized population ( or populations ) well outside the past range . a taxon is presumed extinct in the wild when exhaustive surveys in known and / or expected habitat , at appropriate times ( diurnal , seasonal , annual ) , throughout its historic range have failed to record an individual . surveys should be over a time frame appropriate to the taxon ' s life cycle and life form .

critically endangered ( cr ) a taxon is critically endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria a to e for critically endangered ( see section v ) , and it is therefore considered to be facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild .

endangered ( en ) a taxon is endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria a to e for endangered ( see section v ) , and it is therefore considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild .

vulnerable ( vu ) a taxon is vulnerable when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria a to e for vulnerable ( see section v ) , and it is therefore considered to be facing a high risk of extinction in the wild .

near threatened ( nt ) a taxon is near threatened when it has been evaluated against the criteria but does not qualify for critically endangered , endangered or vulnerable now , but is close to qualifying for or is likely to qualify for a threatened category in the near future .

least concern ( lc ) a taxon is least concern when it has been evaluated against the criteria and does not qualify for critically endangered , endangered , vulnerable or near threatened . widespread and abundant taxa are included in this category .

data deficient ( dd ) a taxon is data deficient when there is inadequate information to make a direct , or indirect , assessment of its risk of extinction based on its distribution and / or population status . a taxon in this category may be well studied , and its biology well known , but appropriate data on abundance and / or distribution are lacking . data deficient is therefore not a category of threat . listing of taxa in this category indicates that more information is required and acknowledges the possibility that future research will show that threatened classification is appropriate . it is important to make positive use of whatever data are available . in many cases great care should be exercised in choosing between dd and a threatened status . if the range of a taxon is suspected to be relatively circumscribed , and a considerable period of time has elapsed since the last record of the taxon , threatened status may well be justified .

not evaluated ( ne ) a taxon is not evaluated when it is has not yet been evaluated against the criteria .

note : as in previous iucn categories , the abbreviation of each category ( in parenthesis ) follows the english denominations when translated into other languages ( see annex 2 ) .

( e ) the effects of introduced taxa , hybridization , pathogens , pollutants , competitors or parasites .

e . quantitative analysis showing the probability of extinction in the wild is at least 50 % within 10 years or three generations , whichever is the longer ( up to a maximum of 100 years ) .

a . severely fragmented or known to exist at no more than five locations .

e . quantitative analysis showing the probability of extinction in the wild is at least 20 % within 20 years or five generations , whichever is the longer ( up to a maximum of 100 years ) .

a . severely fragmented or known to exist at no more than 10 locations .

1 . population size estimated to number fewer than 1 , 000 mature individuals .

2 . population with a very restricted area of occupancy ( typically less than 20 km 2 ) or number of locations ( typically five or fewer ) such that it is prone to the effects of human activities or stochastic events within a very short time period in an uncertain future , and is thus capable of becoming critically endangered or even extinct in a very short time period .

e . quantitative analysis showing the probability of extinction in the wild is at least 10 % within 100 years .

the red list criteria should be applied to a taxon based on the available evidence concerning its numbers , trend and distribution . in cases where there are evident threats to a taxon through , for example , deterioration of its only known habitat , a threatened listing may be justified , even though there may be little direct information on the biological status of the taxon itself . in all these instances there are uncertainties associated with the available information and how it was obtained . these uncertainties may be categorized as natural variability , semantic uncertainty and measurement error ( akçakaya et al . 2000 ) . this section provides guidance on how to recognize and deal with these uncertainties when using the criteria . more information is available in the guidelines for using the iucn red list criteria .

natural variability results from the fact that species ' life histories and the environments in which they live change over time and space . the effect of this variation on the criteria is limited , because each parameter refers to a specific time or spatial scale . semantic uncertainty arises from vagueness in the definition of terms or lack of consistency in different assessors ' usage of them . despite attempts to make the definitions of the terms used in the criteria exact , in some cases this is not possible without the loss of generality . measurement error is often the largest source of uncertainty ; it arises from the lack of precise information about the parameters used in the criteria . this may be due to inaccuracies in estimating the values or a lack of knowledge . measurement error may be reduced or eliminated by acquiring additional data . for further details , see akçakaya et al . ( 2000 ) and burgman et al . ( 1999 ) .

one of the simplest ways to represent uncertainty is to specify a best estimate and a range of plausible values . the best estimate itself might be a range , but in any case the best estimate should always be included in the range of plausible values . when data are very uncertain , the range for the best estimate might be the range of plausible values . there are various methods that can be used to establish the plausible range . it may be based on confidence intervals , the opinion of a single expert , or the consensus opinion of a group of experts . whichever method is used should be stated and justified in the documentation .

when interpreting and using uncertain data , attitudes toward risk and uncertainty may play an important role . attitudes have two components . first , assessors need to consider whether they will include the full range of plausible values in assessments , or whether they will exclude extreme values from consideration ( known as dispute tolerance ) . an assessor with a low dispute tolerance would include all values , thereby increasing the uncertainty , whereas an assessor with a high dispute tolerance would exclude extremes , reducing the uncertainty . second , assessors need to consider whether they have a precautionary or evidentiary attitude to risk ( known as risk tolerance ) . a precautionary attitude will classify a taxon as threatened unless it is certain that it is not threatened , whereas an evidentiary attitude will classify a taxon as threatened only when there is strong evidence to support a threatened classification . assessors should resist an evidentiary attitude and adopt a precautionary but realistic attitude to uncertainty when applying the criteria , for example , by using plausible lower bounds , rather than best estimates , in determining population size , especially if it is fluctuating . all attitudes should be explicitly documented .

an assessment using a point estimate ( i . e . single numerical value ) will lead to a single red list category . however , when a plausible range for each parameter is used to evaluate the criteria , a range of categories may be obtained , reflecting the uncertainties in the data . a single category , based on a specific attitude to uncertainty , should always be listed along with the criteria met , while the range of plausible categories should be indicated in the documentation ( see annex 3 ) .

where data are so uncertain that any category is plausible , the category of ' data deficient ' should be assigned . however , it is important to recognize that this category indicates that the data are inadequate to determine the degree of threat faced by a taxon , not necessarily that the taxon is poorly known or indeed not threatened . although data deficient is not a threatened category , it indicates a need to obtain more information on a taxon to determine the appropriate listing ; moreover , it requires documentation with whatever available information there is .

under section v ( the criteria for critically endangered , endangered and vulnerable ) there is a hierarchical alphanumeric numbering system of criteria and subcriteria . these criteria and subcriteria ( all three levels ) form an integral part of the red list assessment and all those that result in the assignment of a threatened category must be specified after the category . under the criteria a to c and d under vulnerable , the first level of the hierarchy is indicated by the use of numbers ( 1 - 4 ) and if more than one is met , they are separated by means of the ' + ' symbol . the second level is indicated by the use of the lower - case alphabet characters ( a - e ) . these are listed without any punctuation . a third level of the hierarchy under criteria b and c involves the use of lower case roman numerals ( i - v ) . these are placed in parentheses ( with no space between the preceding alphabet character and start of the parenthesis ) and separated by the use of commas if more than one is listed . where more than one criterion is met , they should be separated by semicolons . the following are examples of such usage :

all assessments published on the iucn red list are freely available for public use . to ensure assessments are fully justified and to allow red list assessment data to be analysed , thus making the iucn red list a powerful tool for conservation and policy decisions , a set of supporting information is required to accompany every assessment submitted for publication on the iucn red list of threatened species ™ :

required supporting information under specific conditions ( e . g . taxa assessed under specific red list categories or criteria , plant assessments , reassessed taxa , etc . ) .

tools available for preparing and submitting assessments for the iucn red list , including the iucn species information service ( sis ) and ramas® red list ( akçakaya and ferson 2001 ) .

note that the documentation standards and consistency checks for iucn red list assessments and species accounts will be updated on a regular basis .

click here for a summary of the five criteria ( a - e ) used to evaluate if a taxon belongs in an iucn red list threatened category ( critically endangered , endangered or vulnerable ) .

akçakaya , h . r . and ferson , s . 2001 . ramas ® red list : threatened species classifications under uncertainty . version 2 . 0 . applied biomathematics , new york .

akçakaya , h . r . , ferson , s . , burgman , m . a . , keith , d . a . , mace , g . m . and todd , c . a . 2000 . making consistent iucn classifications under uncertainty . conservation biology 14 : 1001 - 1013 .

baillie , j . and groombridge , b . ( eds ) . 1996 . 1996 iucn red list of threatened animals . iucn , gland , switzerland .

burgman , m . a . , keith , d . a . and walshe , t . v . 1999 . uncertainty in comparative risk analysis of threatened australian plant species . risk analysis 19 : 585 - 598 .

fitter , r . and fitter , m . ( eds ) . 1987 . the road to extinction . iucn , gland , switzerland .

gärdenfors , u . , hilton - taylor , c . , mace , g . , and rodríguez , j . p . , 2001 . the application of iucn red list criteria at regional levels . conservation biology 15 : 1206 - 1212 .

hilton - taylor , c . ( compiler ) . 2000 . 2000 iucn red list of threatened species . iucn , gland , switzerland and cambridge , uk .

iucn . 1993 . draft iucn red list categories . iucn , gland , switzerland .

iucn . 1994 . iucn red list categories . prepared by the iucn species survival commission . iucn , gland , switzerland .

iucn . 1996 . resolution 1 . 4 . species survival commission . resolutions and recommendations , pp . 7 - 8 . world conservation congress , 13 - 23 october 1996 , montreal , canada . iucn , gland , switzerland .

iucn . 1998 . guidelines for re - introductions . prepared by the iucn / ssc re - introduction specialist group . iucn , gland , switzerland and cambridge , uk .

iucn . 2001 . iucn red list categories and criteria : version 3 . 1 . iucn species survival commission . iucn , gland , switzerland and cambridge , uk .

iucn . 2003 . guidelines for application of iucn red list criteria at regional levels : version 3 . 0 . iucn species survival commission . iucn , gland , switzerland and cambridge , uk .

iucn . 2012 . guidelines for application of iucn red list criteria at regional and national levels : version 4 . 0 . gland , switzerland and cambridge , uk : iucn .

iucn / ssc criteria review working group . 1999 . iucn red list criteria review provisional report : draft of the proposed changes and recommendations . species 31 - 32 : 43 - 57 .

mace , g . m . , collar , n . , cooke , j . , gaston , k . j . , ginsberg , j . r . , leader - williams , n . , maunder , m . and milner - gulland , e . j . 1992 . the development of new criteria for listing species on the iucn red list . species 19 : 16 ? 22 .

mace , g . m . and lande , r . 1991 . assessing extinction threats : toward a re - evaluation of iucn threatened species categories . conservation biology 5 : 148 ? 157 .

mace , g . m . and stuart , s . n . 1994 . draft iucn red list categories , version 2 . 2 . species 21 - 22 : 13 - 24 .

oldfield , s . , lusty , c . and mackinven , a . 1998 . the world list of threatened trees . world conservation press , cambridge .

the convention aims to ensure conservation of wild flora and fauna species and their habitats . special attention is given to endangered and vulnerable species , including endangered and vulnerable migratory species specified in appendices .

the parties undertake to take all appropriate measures to ensure the conservation of the habitats of the wild flora and fauna species . such measures should be included in the parties planning and development policies and pollution control , with particular attention to the conservation of wild flora and fauna . the parties undertake to promote education and disseminate general information concerning the need to conserve species of wild flora and fauna and their habitats .

the convention establishes a standing committee on which the parties are represented by their delegates . the committee ' s principal task is to monitor the provisions of this convention in the light of development of the wild flora and the assessment of its needs . for this purpose , the standing committee is especially competent to make recommendations to the parties and amendments to the appendices where these protected species are specified .

appendix iv - prohibited means and methods of killing , capture and other forms of exploitation .

cox , n . and temple , h . j . ( global reptile assessment )

justification : listed as endangered because its extent of occurrence is not much greater than 100km2 , it is known from only four small islands , there is continuing decline in the extent and quality of its habitat . the population trend may now have more or less stabilized , but this is a recent change and could easily be reversed .

this species is endemic to the western cyclade islands ( milos , syphnos , kimolos and polyaigos ) of greece . it is found from sea level up to 400m asl ( the highest point on the islands ) .

the population probably totals around 3 , 000 individuals , with about 2 , 500 of these on western milos . subspecies syphnoensis ( from island of syphnos ) is very rare , with only occasional specimens recorded . the population is now more or less stable , but over the last 30 - 40 years there have been significant declines as a result of collecting and road kills .

it can be found throughout the islands on dry , sunny hillsides and in traditionally cultivated land , in densely vegetated areas close to water with rocky outcrops , and also in pools of water . its most important habitat is small creeks . the female lays a clutch of between four and 11 eggs .


the spined dwarf mantis ( ameles fasciipennis ) is a species of praying mantis that is endemic to italy .

it has only been collected once , probably in 1871 in the tolentino area , and has not been seen since , despite extensive entomological surveys of the region .

spined dwarf mantis

spined dwarf mantis <EOT> i ' ve already debunked one common mistake in the title , which in my opinion puts me way ahead of the game already . the name of the insect is often incorrectly spelled " preying mantis , " and that ' s understandable , since mantises are famed for their ability to eat other bugs and even each other . ( the female mantis will often devour her mate after sex , a dream come true if the male mantis is a " vore " fetishist , but a pretty raw deal otherwise . ) but no , the name refers to the posture of the insect ' s bent forearms , which look a little like hands clasped in prayer .

the human - like ( and religious ! ) posture of the mantis may be what led to a tradition in many ancient cultures , from greece to egypt to china , that this insect is a noble and perhaps even magical creature . that tradition is probably the source for the modern belief that mantises are protected by law , an urban legend i remember from my childhood . or maybe that ' s common - sense advice due to the insects ' value to modern gardeners . a single mantis will eat its own weight in garden pests , from aphids to yellow jackets , ever single day !

html public " - / / w3c / / dtd xhtml 1 . 0 strict / / en " " urltoken "

thank you for taking the time to provide feedback on the iucn red list of threatened species website , we are grateful for your input .

this species is endemic to italy , the type ( and only ) specimen being collected from " tolentino " .

only one specimen of a . fasciipennis is known which is also the holotype .

the only known specimen is labelled as being collected from " tolentino " , a town in central italy which now has intensive land cultivation over most of its territory . it is possible that , when this specimen was collected at the end of the 19th century , tolentino was less intensively cultivated and a more suitable vegetation for this genus of mantids was present , such as mediterranean vegetation and natural grassland and shrubland , but we have no detailed data on this .

the main threat to this species is habitat reduction since tolentino is now located in an intensively cultivated area unsuitable for large populations of other species of mantids which can now only be found in the peripheries . however , no real information exists on the effect this has had on a . fasciipennis due to only one specimen being known .

to make use of this information , please check the < terms of use > .

eol content is automatically assembled from many different content providers . as a result , from time to time you may find pages on eol that are confusing .

to request an improvement , please leave a comment on the page . thank you !

ah , june . the bees are buzzing , the crickets are chirping , the fireflies are glowing , and the june bugs are—doing whatever june bugs do , i guess ? it ' s their month . in the united kingdom , the connection between summer and the insect kingdom has been formalized by turning the last week of june into national insect week . we ' re also celebrating our six - legged friends all month , and we ' ve called in ken jennings ( not an insect , but at least a wasp ) as a guest expert . he tells us that our insect knowledge has a few bugs .

ken jennings is the author of eleven books , most recently his junior genius guides , because i said so ! , and maphead . he ' s also the proud owner of an underwhelming bag o ' crap . follow him at urltoken or on twitter as @ kenjennings .

woot - off special offers : $ 5 ships all day and 25 % off shirt . woot ! !

urltoken is operated by woot services llc . products on urltoken are sold by woot , inc . , other than items on gourmet . woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page . product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ literary point of view ; the narratives do not express woot ' s editorial opinion . aside from literary abuse , your use of this site also subjects you to woot ' s terms of use and privacy policy . woot may designate a user comment as a quality post , but that doesn ' t mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post .

woot logos , site design , & content © woot , inc . 2004 - 2018 . all rights reserved .

for the arctiid moth genus erroneously named ameles by walker in 1855 , see aemilia ( moth ) .

this article is issued from wikipedia - version of the 10 / 13 / 2015 . the text is available under the creative commons attribution / share alike but additional terms may apply for the media files .

it has beautiful images and viral videos that are way more fun than reading all the text in traditional encyclopedias .

if you found sussle interesting , then give back by adding something interesting for others .

it ' s super easy , so it won ' t take more than a minute .

copyright © 2016 sussle . all rights reserved . all registered trademarks are the property of their respective owners without intent to infringe .

we collect the best images , videos , and facts by topic . please join us .

to ensure the integrity of sussle ' s content , we must verify that each member represents a distinct person . please send an email from your primary facebook email to :

html public " - / / w3c / / dtd html 4 . 01 transitional / / en "

with the help of more than 100 of the iucn species survival commission’s specialist groups , global wildlife conservation has compiled this list of species considered lost across more than 160 countries as part of the search for lost species . the definition of “lost” varied by taxa . we welcome additional nominations and encourage conservationists , scientists and naturalists to launch searches for species on this broad list . report an observation on the search for lost species inauralist page . iucn red list of threatened species status key :

carìábido de doramas ( fide machado , a . , & morera , m . ( eds . ) . ( 2005 ) . nombres comunes de las plantas y los animales de canarias . islas canarias : academia canaria de la lengua .

probably extinct in martì _ n esquivel , j . l . , fajardo gonzìález , s . , cabrera pì©rez , m . ì . , arechavaleta hernìández , m . , aguiar clavijo , a . , martì _ n de abreu , s . , & naranjo morales , m . ( 2005 ) . evaluaciì _ n 2004 de especies amenazadas de canarias . especies en peligro de extinciì _ n , sensibles a la alteraciì _ n de su hìábitat y vulnerables . santa cruz de tenerife : consejerì _ a de medioi ambiente y ordenaciì _ n territorial , gobierno de canarias .

want more info ? go to urltoken or contact us at info @ urltoken .

there are lots of additional ways you can join the global search ! make a donation to support the expeditions . become a corporate sponsor of the initiative or sponsor a specific expedition . share the lost stories on facebook , instagram and twitter .

no matter how big or small , there is always something you can do to help spread the conservation message .

© 2017 global wildlife conservation . all rights reserved . global wildlife conservation is a registered 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) .

html public " - / / w3c / / dtd xhtml 1 . 0 transitional / / en " " urltoken "

unfortunately , the page you were trying to retrieve is not available on myfwc . com . this could have happened as content on our site is constantly being reviewed and updated , and occasionally , deleted .

below is a helpful list of urltoken ' s most viewed pages . if you still are unable to find what you are looking for , please use the search box in the upper right - hand corner of this page .

fwc facts : bears are sexually dimorphic . this means adult males are larger than adult females of the same age .

florida fish and wildlife conservation commission • farris bryant building 620 s . meridian st . • tallahassee , fl 32399 - 1600 • ( 850 ) 488 - 4676

pursuant to section 120 . 74 , florida statutes , the fish and wildlife conservation commission has published its 2017 agency regulatory plan .

under florida law , e - mail addresses are public records . if you do not want your e - mail address released in response to a public records request , do not send electronic mail to this entity . instead , contact this office by phone or in writing .