DOCSLIB.ORG

Husbandry Manual For

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Husbandry Manual For Husbandry Manual For Green tree frog Litoria caerulea Amphibia: Hylidae Compiler: Brad Harper Date of Preparation: 13/8/07 Western Sydney Institute of TAFE, Richmond Course Name and Number: Cert 3 Captive animals 1068 Lecturer: Graeme Phipps 1 DISCLAIMER The information held with in this Husbandry Manual should only be used as a guide. Views and opinions expressed by the author may not necessarily be that of others working with such species. The information held within can only be used as a general guide in the husbandry and care of the species outline within this Husbandry Manual. The Author Brad Harper with 4 of his pet Litoria caerulea Amphibian Husbandry Manual- Litoria caerulea- Brad Harper 2008 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 5 2 TAXONOMY ...................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 SUBSPECIES .................................................................................................................................. 7 2.3 RECENT SYNONYMS ..................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 OTHER COMMON NAMES ............................................................................................................. 7 3 NATURAL HISTORY ....................................................................................................................... 8 3.1 MORPHOMETRICS ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.1 Mass And Basic Body Measurements ..................................................................................... 8 3.1.2 Sexual Dimorphism ................................................................................................................. 8 3.1.3 Distinguishing Features .......................................................................................................... 8 3.2 DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT ....................................................................................................... 9 3.3 CONSERVATION STATUS .............................................................................................................. 9 3.4 LONGEVITY ................................................................................................................................ 10 3.4.1 In the Wild ............................................................................................................................ 10 3.4.2 In Captivity ........................................................................................................................... 10 3.4.3 Techniques Used to Determine Age in Adults ....................................................................... 10 4 HOUSING REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................ 11 4.1 EXHIBIT/ENCLOSURE DESIGN .................................................................................................... 11 4.2 HOLDING AREA DESIGN ............................................................................................................. 12 4.3 SPATIAL REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................... 12 4.4 POSITION OF ENCLOSURES ......................................................................................................... 13 4.5 WEATHER PROTECTION.............................................................................................................. 13 4.6 TEMPERATURE REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................. 13 4.7 SUBSTRATE ................................................................................................................................ 13 4.8 NESTBOXES AND/OR BEDDING MATERIAL ................................................................................. 14 4.9 ENCLOSURE FURNISHINGS ......................................................................................................... 14 5 GENERAL HUSBANDRY ............................................................................................................... 16 5.1 HYGIENE AND CLEANING ........................................................................................................... 16 5.2 RECORD KEEPING ...................................................................................................................... 17 5.3 METHODS OF IDENTIFICATION ................................................................................................... 18 5.4 ROUTINE DATA COLLECTION ..................................................................................................... 18 6 FEEDING REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................................... 19 6.1 DIET IN THE WILD ...................................................................................................................... 20 6.2 CAPTIVE DIET ............................................................................................................................ 20 6.3 SUPPLEMENTS ............................................................................................................................ 21 6.4 PRESENTATION OF FOOD ............................................................................................................ 21 7 HANDLING AND TRANSPORT ................................................................................................... 22 7.1 TIMING OF CAPTURE AND HANDLING ........................................................................................ 22 7.2 CATCHING BAGS ........................................................................................................................ 22 7.3 CAPTURE AND RESTRAINT TECHNIQUES .................................................................................... 22 7.4 WEIGHING AND EXAMINATION .................................................................................................. 23 7.5 RELEASE .................................................................................................................................... 23 7.6 TRANSPORT REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................................... 24 7.6.1 Box Design ............................................................................................................................ 24 7.6.2 Furnishings ........................................................................................................................... 24 7.6.3 Water and Food .................................................................................................................... 25 7.6.4 Animals per Box .................................................................................................................... 25 7.6.5 Timing of Transportation ...................................................................................................... 25 7.6.6 Release from Box .................................................................................................................. 26 Amphibian Husbandry Manual- Litoria caerulea- Brad Harper 2008 3 8 HEALTH REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................................... 27 8.1 DAILY HEALTH CHECKS ............................................................................................................ 27 8.2 DETAILED PHYSICAL EXAMINATION .......................................................................................... 29 8.2.1 Chemical Restraint ............................................................................................................... 29 8.2.2 Physical Examination ........................................................................................................... 32 8.3 ROUTINE TREATMENTS .............................................................................................................. 33 8.4 KNOWN HEALTH PROBLEMS ...................................................................................................... 34 8.5 QUARANTINE REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................... 40 9 BEHAVIOUR .................................................................................................................................... 41 9.1 ACTIVITY ................................................................................................................................... 41 9.2 SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ................................................................................................................... 41 9.3 REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOUR ...................................................................................................... 42 9.4 BATHING .................................................................................................................................... 43 9.5 BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS ........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Return Rates of Male Hylid Frogs Litoria Genimaculata, L. Nannotis, L
    Vol. 11: 183–188, 2010 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Published online April 16 doi: 10.3354/esr00253 Endang Species Res OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Return rates of male hylid frogs Litoria genimaculata, L. nannotis, L. rheocola and Nyctimystes dayi after toe-tipping Andrea D. Phillott1, 2,*, Keith R. McDonald1, 3, Lee F. Skerratt1, 2 1Amphibian Disease Ecology Group and 2School of Public Health, Tropical Medicine and Rehabilitation Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland 4811, Australia 3Threatened Species Branch, Department of Environment and Resource Management, PO Box 975, Atherton, Queensland 4883, Australia ABSTRACT: Toe-tipping is a commonly used procedure for mark-recapture studies of frogs, although it has been criticised for its potential influence on frog behaviour, site fidelity and mortality. We com- pared 24 h return rates of newly toe-tipped frogs to those previously toe-tipped and found no evi- dence of a stress response reflected by avoidance behaviour for 3 species: Litoria genimaculata, L. rheocola and Nyctimystes dayi. L. nannotis was the only studied species to demonstrate a greater reaction to toe-tipping than handling alone; however, return rates (65%) in the 1 to 3 mo after mark- ing were the highest of any species, showing that the reaction did not endure. The comparatively milder short-term response to toe-tipping in N. dayi (24% return rate) may have been caused by the species’ reduced opportunity for breeding. Intermediate-term return rates were relatively high for 2 species, L. nannotis and L. genimaculata, given their natural history, suggesting there were no major adverse effects of toe-tipping. Longer-term adverse effects could not be ruled out for L.
    [Show full text]
  • Amphibiaweb's Illustrated Amphibians of the Earth
    AmphibiaWeb's Illustrated Amphibians of the Earth Created and Illustrated by the 2020-2021 AmphibiaWeb URAP Team: Alice Drozd, Arjun Mehta, Ash Reining, Kira Wiesinger, and Ann T. Chang This introduction to amphibians was written by University of California, Berkeley AmphibiaWeb Undergraduate Research Apprentices for people who love amphibians. Thank you to the many AmphibiaWeb apprentices over the last 21 years for their efforts. Edited by members of the AmphibiaWeb Steering Committee CC BY-NC-SA 2 Dedicated in loving memory of David B. Wake Founding Director of AmphibiaWeb (8 June 1936 - 29 April 2021) Dave Wake was a dedicated amphibian biologist who mentored and educated countless people. With the launch of AmphibiaWeb in 2000, Dave sought to bring the conservation science and basic fact-based biology of all amphibians to a single place where everyone could access the information freely. Until his last day, David remained a tirelessly dedicated scientist and ally of the amphibians of the world. 3 Table of Contents What are Amphibians? Their Characteristics ...................................................................................... 7 Orders of Amphibians.................................................................................... 7 Where are Amphibians? Where are Amphibians? ............................................................................... 9 What are Bioregions? ..................................................................................10 Conservation of Amphibians Why Save Amphibians? .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Conservation Action Plans for Mongolian Reptiles and Amphibians
    Summary Conservation Action Plans for Mongolian Reptiles and Amphibians Compiled by Terbish, Kh., Munkhbayar, Kh., Clark, E.L., Munkhbat, J. and Monks, E.M. Edited by Munkhbaatar, M., Baillie, J.E.M., Borkin, L., Batsaikhan, N., Samiya, R. and Semenov, D.V. ERSITY O IV F N E U D U E T C A A T T S I O E N H T M ONGOLIA THE WORLD BANK i ii This publication has been funded by the World Bank’s Netherlands-Mongolia Trust Fund for Environmental Reform. The fi ndings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily refl ect the views of the Executive Directors of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colours, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgement on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The World Conservation Union (IUCN) have contributed to the production of the Summary Conservation Action Plans for Mongolian Reptiles and Amphibians, providing technical support, staff time, and data. IUCN supports the production of the Summary Conservation Action Plans for Mongolian Reptiles and Amphibians, but the information contained in this document does not necessarily represent the views of IUCN. Published by: Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, NW1 4RY Copyright: © Zoological Society of London and contributors 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Brown Tree Frog
    Our Wildlife Fact Sheet Southern Brown Tree Frog Southern Brown Tree Frogs are one of Victoria’s common frog species. Scientific name Litoria ewingi Did you know? The Southern Brown Tree Frog is an agile hunter. It can leap to catch insects in mid flight. Their large sticky toes make them great climbers. Figure 1. Southern Brown Tree Frog metamorphs © A. Houston Female Southern Brown Tree Frogs can lay up to 600 DSE 2008 eggs at a time. Distribution It takes between 12 and 26 weeks for Southern Brown Southern Brown Tree Frogs occur in southern Victoria, tadpoles to turn into frogs. Tasmania and along the south coast of New South Wales. Description They are found across most of southern, central and Southern Brown Tree Frogs grow up to about 50 mm in north-eastern Victoria, but do not occur in the north- length. west corner of the state. In north-central Victoria and in Their colour is true to their name as they are brown on parts of the state’s north-east they are replaced by the their backs. The backs of their thighs are yellowish to closely-related Plains Brown Tree Frog (Litoria bright orange, and they have a white grainy belly. They paraewingi). also have a distinctive white stripe from the eye to their fore-leg. Their skin is smooth with small lumps. They have webbing on their feet that goes half way up their toes while their fingers have no webbing at all. Breeding males have a light brown vocal sac. Diet Southern Brown Tree Frogs feed mainly on flying insects such as mosquitoes, moths and flies.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Advice Litoria Dayi Lace-Eyed Tree Frog
    THREATENED SPECIES SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE Established under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The Minister’s delegate approved this Conservation Advice on 13/07/2017. Conservation Advice Litoria dayi lace-eyed tree frog Conservation Status Litoria dayi (lace-eyed tree frog) is listed as Endangered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cwlth) (EPBC Act) effective 16 July 2000. The species is eligible for listing under the EPBC Act as on 16 July 2000 it was listed as Endangered under Schedule 1 of the preceding Act, the Endangered Species Protection Act 1992 (Cwlth). Species can also be listed as threatened under state and territory legislation. For information on the current listing status of this species under relevant state or territory legislation, see http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl . The main factor that was the cause of the species being eligible for listing in the Endangered category was a dramatic range contraction with an observed reduction in population size of greater than 50 percent. Populations are no longer present at altitudes greater than 300 m, likely due to chytridiomycosis (Hero et al. 2004). This species’ status under the EBPC Act is currently being reviewed as part of a species expert assessment plan for frogs. Description The lace-eyed tree frog was recently transferred to the genus Litoria from the genus Nyctimystes after Kraus (2013) showed that it did not meet the morphological characteristics for assignment to that genus (Cogger 2014). This species is a small to medium sized frog growing to 50 mm in snout-to-vent length.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeography Reveals an Ancient Cryptic Radiation in East-Asian Tree
    Dufresnes et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology (2016) 16:253 DOI 10.1186/s12862-016-0814-x RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Phylogeography reveals an ancient cryptic radiation in East-Asian tree frogs (Hyla japonica group) and complex relationships between continental and island lineages Christophe Dufresnes1, Spartak N. Litvinchuk2, Amaël Borzée3,4, Yikweon Jang4, Jia-Tang Li5, Ikuo Miura6, Nicolas Perrin1 and Matthias Stöck7,8* Abstract Background: In contrast to the Western Palearctic and Nearctic biogeographic regions, the phylogeography of Eastern-Palearctic terrestrial vertebrates has received relatively little attention. In East Asia, tectonic events, along with Pleistocene climatic conditions, likely affected species distribution and diversity, especially through their impact on sea levels and the consequent opening and closing of land-bridges between Eurasia and the Japanese Archipelago. To better understand these effects, we sequenced mitochondrial and nuclear markers to determine phylogeographic patterns in East-Asian tree frogs, with a particular focus on the widespread H. japonica. Results: We document several cryptic lineages within the currently recognized H. japonica populations, including two main clades of Late Miocene divergence (~5 Mya). One occurs on the northeastern Japanese Archipelago (Honshu and Hokkaido) and the Russian Far-East islands (Kunashir and Sakhalin), and the second one inhabits the remaining range, comprising southwestern Japan, the Korean Peninsula, Transiberian China, Russia and Mongolia. Each clade further features strong allopatric Plio-Pleistocene subdivisions (~2-3 Mya), especially among continental and southwestern Japanese tree frog populations. Combined with paleo-climate-based distribution models, the molecular data allowed the identification of Pleistocene glacial refugia and continental routes of postglacial recolonization. Phylogenetic reconstructions further supported genetic homogeneity between the Korean H.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overdue Review and Reclassification of the Australasian
    AustralasianAustralasian JournalJournal ofof HerpetologyHerpetology ISSN 1836-5698 (Print) ISSN 1836-5779 (Online) Hoser, R. T. 2020. For the first time ever! An overdue review and reclassification of Australasian Tree Frogs (Amphibia: Anura: Pelodryadidae), including formal descriptions of 12 tribes, 11 subtribes, 34 genera, 26 subgenera, 62 species and 12 subspecies new to science. Australasian Journal of Herpetology 44-46:1-192. ISSUE 46, PUBLISHED 5 JUNE 2020 Hoser, R. T. 2020. For the first time ever! An overdue review and reclassification of Australasian Tree Frogs (Amphibia: Anura: Pelodryadidae), including formal descriptions of 12 tribes, 11 subtribes, 34 genera, 26 130 Australasiansubgenera, 62 species Journal and 12 subspecies of Herpetologynew to science. Australasian Journal of Herpetology 44-46:1-192. ... Continued from AJH Issue 45 ... zone of apparently unsuitable habitat of significant geological antiquity and are therefore reproductively Underside of thighs have irregular darker patches and isolated and therefore evolving in separate directions. hind isde of thigh has irregular fine creamish coloured They are also morphologically divergent, warranting stripes. Skin is leathery and with numerous scattered identification of the unnamed population at least to tubercles which may or not be arranged in well-defined subspecies level as done herein. longitudinal rows, including sometimes some of medium to large size and a prominent one on the eyelid. Belly is The zone dividing known populations of each species is smooth except for some granular skin on the lower belly only about 30 km in a straight line. and thighs. Vomerine teeth present, but weakly P. longirostris tozerensis subsp. nov. is separated from P.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Risk Assessment of Cane Toads in Kakadu National Park Scientist Report 164, Supervising Scientist, Darwin NT
    supervising scientist 164 report A preliminary risk assessment of cane toads in Kakadu National Park RA van Dam, DJ Walden & GW Begg supervising scientist national centre for tropical wetland research This report has been prepared by staff of the Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist (eriss) as part of our commitment to the National Centre for Tropical Wetland Research Rick A van Dam Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist, Locked Bag 2, Jabiru NT 0886, Australia (Present address: Sinclair Knight Merz, 100 Christie St, St Leonards NSW 2065, Australia) David J Walden Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist, GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801, Australia George W Begg Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist, GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801, Australia This report should be cited as follows: van Dam RA, Walden DJ & Begg GW 2002 A preliminary risk assessment of cane toads in Kakadu National Park Scientist Report 164, Supervising Scientist, Darwin NT The Supervising Scientist is part of Environment Australia, the environmental program of the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage © Commonwealth of Australia 2002 Supervising Scientist Environment Australia GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801 Australia ISSN 1325-1554 ISBN 0 642 24370 0 This work is copyright Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Supervising Scientist Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Dwarf Treefrog (Litoria Fallax) 1 Native Range and Status in the United States
    Eastern Dwarf Treefrog (Litoria fallax) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, May 2012 Revised, March 2017 Web Version, 2/9/2018 Photo: Michael Jefferies. Licensed under CC BY-NC. Available: http://eol.org/data_objects/25762625. (March 2017). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From Hero et al. (2009): “This Australian species occurs along the coast and in adjacent areas from Cairns in northern Queensland south to southern New South Wales, including Fraser Island.” Status in the United States From Hero et al. (2009): “Guam” 1 Means of Introductions in the United Status From Christy et al. (2007): “The initial specimen of the now-established species L. fallax was discovered in the central courtyard of Guam’s International Airport in 1968 (Falanruw, 1976), leading Eldredge (1988) to speculate that the species was brought to Guam on board an aircraft. Aircraft and maritime vessels entered Guam from Australia, the home range of the species (Cogger, 2000) during the late 1960s, although documentation with respect to the frequency of these arrivals and the types of commodities shipped is difficult to obtain. It is therefore unclear whether the Guam population is the result of released pets, stowaways onboard a transport vessel, or stowaways in suitable cargo such as fruit or vegetables.” Remarks From GBIF (2016): “BASIONYM Hylomantis fallax Peters, 1880” 2 Biology and Ecology Taxonomic Hierarchy and Taxonomic Standing From ITIS (2017): “Kingdom Animalia Subkingdom Bilateria Infrakingdom Deuterostomia Phylum Chordata Subphylum Vertebrata Infraphylum Gnathostomata Superclass Tetrapoda Class Amphibia Order Anura Family Hylidae Subfamily Pelodryadinae Genus Litoria Species Litoria fallax (Peters, 1880)” “Current Standing: valid” Size, Weight, and Age Range From Atlas of Living Australia (2017): “Up to less than 30mm” 2 Environment From Hero et al.
    [Show full text]
  • NSW Native Animal Keepers' Species List 2014
    NSW Native Animal Keepers’ Species List 2014 The NSW Native Animal Keepers’ Species List 2014 (also available at www.environment.nsw.gov.au) contains the names of all species that may be kept under licence. If the animal species you want to keep isn’t listed, you generally cannot keep it, although the Department might consider requests to keep unlisted species of reptile, bird or amphibian. If you are applying for a licence for an unlisted species, you will need to supply details of the species and numbers you are proposing to keep, the legal availability of the species and its husbandry requirements in captivity. A new species list is produced by the Department each year. You can only hold an animal that is applicable to class as listed in the current year’s species list. Some animals are listed as exempt and a licence is not required to hold or trade those species (see exempt species list at the back of this document). Some hybridised animals are recorded in this list. The Department does not support native animal keepers who breed between animals of different species. Regulations prohibit the breeding of native waterfowl with domestic waterfowl. Your licence must be endorsed with the class under which the species is applicable. Holding requirements for venomous reptiles must be in accordance with the requirements contained in the class criteria for advanced reptile venomous category 1,2 or 3 as contained in the “Application for an Advanced Class- Native Animal Keepers’ Licence.” If you acquire or dispose of a native species of Cockatoo listed as applicable to class B1, or any species of animal listed under A2,B2,B3,R2,R3,R4 or R5 you must notify the Director General by email or in writing of the details of the transaction within fourteen days of the transaction taking place.
    [Show full text]
  • 3Systematics and Diversity of Extant Amphibians
    Systematics and Diversity of 3 Extant Amphibians he three extant lissamphibian lineages (hereafter amples of classic systematics papers. We present widely referred to by the more common term amphibians) used common names of groups in addition to scientifi c Tare descendants of a common ancestor that lived names, noting also that herpetologists colloquially refer during (or soon after) the Late Carboniferous. Since the to most clades by their scientifi c name (e.g., ranids, am- three lineages diverged, each has evolved unique fea- bystomatids, typhlonectids). tures that defi ne the group; however, salamanders, frogs, A total of 7,303 species of amphibians are recognized and caecelians also share many traits that are evidence and new species—primarily tropical frogs and salaman- of their common ancestry. Two of the most defi nitive of ders—continue to be described. Frogs are far more di- these traits are: verse than salamanders and caecelians combined; more than 6,400 (~88%) of extant amphibian species are frogs, 1. Nearly all amphibians have complex life histories. almost 25% of which have been described in the past Most species undergo metamorphosis from an 15 years. Salamanders comprise more than 660 species, aquatic larva to a terrestrial adult, and even spe- and there are 200 species of caecilians. Amphibian diver- cies that lay terrestrial eggs require moist nest sity is not evenly distributed within families. For example, sites to prevent desiccation. Thus, regardless of more than 65% of extant salamanders are in the family the habitat of the adult, all species of amphibians Plethodontidae, and more than 50% of all frogs are in just are fundamentally tied to water.
    [Show full text]
  • Wiens Et Al. Page: 1
    Wiens et al. page: 1 1 Supporting Information 2 Appendix S1 3 Expanded Materials and Methods 4 Appendix S1.A. Local Sites. We obtained data on the local species composition 5 of 123 sites throughout the range of Hylidae (Tables S1–S3). Our major source of 6 data was published studies of the amphibian faunas of local sites. We focused on 7 well-studied site, typically of several km2 in size, that represent a single biome or 8 habitat (e.g. tropical lowland rainforest), but include multiple microhabitats (e.g. 9 forest, stream edge, pond). We generally excluded sites spanning multiple 10 biomes, and from poorly known regions in which the observed hylid richness 11 was much lower than for other sites in the same region (possibly reflecting poor 12 sampling or human impacts). In some cases, we also included species lists from 13 national parks or reserves, particularly for regions where we could corroborate 14 these lists with published range maps (e.g. U.S., Australia). For some areas 15 having few obvious sites, we picked localities where large numbers of hylid 16 species have been collected, based on literature or museum records. For areas 17 with very low hylid diversity (e.g., Europe, Asia, Western North America), we 18 used museum records. 19 For most analyses, we used a single, well-studied locality to represent 20 each major biogeographic region (Table 1), in order to reduce potential problems 21 of uneven numbers of sites among biogeographic regions, spatial 22 autocorrelation, and inadequately surveyed sites. For a given region, we used Wiens et al.
    [Show full text]