Species composition of Amphibians and Reptiles in Krau Wildlife Reserve , Pahang , Peninsular Malaysia

the Peninsular Malaysia using this technique (Matsui et al. 2009; Matsui 2009). This paper provides an overview of the herpetofauna of KWR, with additional data based on an intensive 12 month period of drift-fenced pitfall trappings and visual encounter surveys of amphibians at Kuala Gandah field station (one of the five field stations in KWR) and with some notes on revised taxa, ecology, and distribution of the less common species based on compilation of species list from all previous studies in KWR. Knowledge of species richness and community structures is important for conservation and governance on sustainable management of the environment. Such clarification is required to focus effort at crucial areas such as areas with high density of rare species, and areas that are threatened by landscape alteration to initiate mitigation process. Thus, the objectives of this study were to: (1) to document species richness in the region from past and current studies with notes on their current taxonomic status. (2) to examine patterns of community structure and composition, (2) to document taxa occurring species richness in the region from past and current studies with notes on their current taxonomic status.


Introduction
The Krau Wildlife Reserve (KWR) is situated at the east of the Malaysian Main Range (=Titiwangsa Range) and near the basin of Gunung Benom in the Malaysian state of Pahang. This reserve covers an area of 624 km 2 , which makes it the third largest protected area in Peninsular Malaysia. The highest peak within the reserve is Gunung Benom (2,108 m), the third highest mountain in Peninsular Malaysia. Inventories and surveys on the herpetofauna in KWR have commenced since 1972 when the first expedition to Gunung Benom was conducted (Grandison 1972). Since then, other studies have been conducted at various stations within the reserve, such as at Sg. (=River) Chenderoh (Jasmi et al. 1999), Bukit Rengit (Salman et al. 1999;Norsham et al. 2001;Ahmad Shukri 2004;Grace 2006), and Kuala Gandah . These studies, however, were isolated in manner. It is not easy to estimate the actual biodiversity of amphibians as a whole, but diversity of amphibians in KWR has been believed to be relatively well studied based on the many studies listed above. However, this assumption has proven to be erroneous as re-analyses of faunal diversity using different methods (eg. molecular techniques) have resulted in the revision and addition of many new taxa whose status was previously based on morphology (Grandison 1972).
Molecular techniques for associating adult and larval forms of some anurans have resulted in numerous novel species descriptions ), while others have been synonymized (Matsui et al. 2007a), resurrected  or revised under a different nomen (Chan and Grismer 2010). Another method that was used to delimit species boundaries is acoustic characteristics that can be used as a proxy for reproductive isolation. Two new amphibian species were recently described from

Study site
The study focused on Kuala Gandah (3°36′00″ N, 102°09′04″ E) (Figure 1), which is located at the south of KWR, where the National Elephant Conservation Centre is also located. Permission to study here was granted by the DWNP. There are several villages of the indigenous Orang Asli Che Wong (Che Wong tribe) villages in the area, with a total of 45 households around the reserve (Haemamalar et al. 2010). The Che Wong is of the Senoi sub-group, who resides mainly in the forest of Pahang state in Peninsular Malaysia. They depend substantially on forest produce. Other tribes that live here are Temuan and Jah Hut. They maintain many narrow motorbike trails in the reserve as their means of travelling in and out of the forest to the nearest town to get supplies. Some of these trails are included in the plot.

Method
Survey methods include drift-fenced pitfall trapping, diurnal and nocturnal censuses, and opportunistic searches. A total of 126 traps were set up in a 400 x 400 m grid ( Figure 2). The grid was further subdivided into 16 sub-grids, each measuring 100 x 100 m. A total of 9 traps were set upper line in this subgrid, with a distance of 5 m between traps. Galvanized metal drift fences 0.3 m in height were buried ~5 cm below soil surface to prevent animals from burrowing under them. Pitfall traps consist of 18-L plastic buckets (0.5 m deep and 0.2 m in diameter) ( Figure 3). Drain holes were punched at the bottom of each bucket and buried flush with the ground surface, with the drift fence overhanging the lip of each pitfall trap. The traps were opened for 7 continuous days each month for 12 consecutive months and were examined once a day before noon.
The visual encounter survey procedure consisted of active searching for animals using wide-beam headlights at a steady pace within a constrained area along the trails at a specific time at night, usually within the first 2-4 h after dark fall (Table 1). Surveys were conducted for 7 continuous days per month for 12 months. Time spent surveying depended on the density of animals per unit area, based on the pit-fall collection. Animals were caught by hand and brought back for measurements.
Voucher specimens for most taxa were collected to aid the identification of unknown taxa and to collect tissue samples for taxonomic groups requiring further taxonomic resolution. All specimens are deposited at the Institute of Biodiversity, DWNP, Bukit Rengit, KWR. Taxonomic nomenclature follows the Amphibian Species of the World 5.3 by the American Museum of Natural History (http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/), last accessed on 5 June 2009. Taxonomy for Hemidactylus follows Carranza and Arnold (2006); Draco taxonomy follows (Manthey 2008).

Results and Discussion
A total of 1,045 individuals were obtained, comprising 13 families and 38 species ( Table 2). The total frogs was 929, comprising 6 families and 24 species; Bufonidae (2 species), Dicroglossidae (6 species), Megophryidae (3 species), Microhylidae (6 species), Ranidae (6 species) and Rhacophoridae (1 species). For reptiles, a total of 116 individuals were sampled, comprising 7 families and 14 species: Agamidae (2 species), Bataguridae (1 species), Colubridae (2 species), Gekkonidae (2 species), Scincidae (4 species), Typhlopidae (1 species) and Varanidae (2 species). The most sampled anuran species were Micryletta inornata (about 45% of the total amphibians), followed  by Ingerophrynus parvus (19%), and Megophrys nasuta (6%). Among the reptiles, Cyrtodactylus quadrivirgatus was the most frequently sampled (29% of the total reptiles), followed by Aphaniotis fusca (27%) and Eutropis multifasciata (18%). The species accumulation curve shown in Figure 4 reflects the same scenario in most studies of vertebrate communities in which the curve rises steeply at first and levels off in later samples as increasingly rare taxa are added (Gotelli and Colwell 2001). Meanwhile, the asymptote point shows the estimated species richness in the area of study was 38. The species accumulation curve showed no leveling off into an asymptote, suggesting that our sampling did not represent the true species richness in the area.
Gonocephalus bornensis (Schlegel, 1848) was included in the list by Grandison (1972), but it is not known to occur in Peninsular Malaysia (Grismer 2011). It is reported from Indonesian Borneo (de Rooij 1915), Sabah and Sarawak (Das 2004), and Thailand, but reported only once near the border of Surat Thani and Nakhon Si Thammarat (fide Taylor 1963). Thus, this species is omitted from the current list. Cnemaspis affinis (Stoliczka, 1870) has been restricted to Penang Island , and thus, C. affinis reported by Grandison (1972) should be assigned to Cnemaspis flavolineata (fide Grismer et al. 2008). Cyrtodactylus marmoratus is not known to occur in Malaysia (Grismer 2011), and thus, omitted from the current list. From the current study, there are four reptile species of new locality records for KWR: Varanus dumerilii (Varanidae), Ramphotyphlops braminus (Typhlopidae), Dryocalamus subannulatus (Colubridae) and Heosemys spinosa (Bataguridae).
The latest publication on the herpetofauna of Krau was by Chan et al. (2008)   Caudacaecilia nigroflava (Taylor 1960 Limnonectes paramacrodon (Inger, 1966) Limnonectes plicatellus (Stoliczka, 1873) + + + + managed to obtain another additional record, which is Ingerana tenasserimensis (Ranidae). From the latest checklist provided in Table 3, there are now 61 species of amphibians and 68 species of reptiles recorded in KWR, which are approximately 56% and 24% of the total number of species recorded from Peninsular Malaysia, respectively. Habitat loss of many organisms is still occurring in vast areas of tropical Asia including Malaysia. Herpetofaunal diversity, especially of frogs, that are well-known environmental indicators, can provide valuable data usable for environmental conservation relating to the monitoring of biological diversity in Malaysia. This updated checklist can serve as a starting point to help future researchers form long-term strategies in response to habitat and climate change.   Heosemys spinosa (Gray, 1830) +