Frog and Toad Survey Prescription
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Missouri's Toads and Frogs Booklet
TOADSMissouri’s andFROGS by Jeffrey T. Briggler and Tom R. Johnson, Herpetologists www.MissouriConservation.org © 1982, 2008 Missouri Conservation Commission Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Missouri Department of Conservation is available to all individuals without regard to their race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. Questions should be directed to the Department of Conservation, P.O. Box 180, Jefferson City, MO 65102, (573) 751-4115 (voice) or 800-735-2966 (TTY), or to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Federal Assistance, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop: MBSP-4020, Arlington, VA 22203. Cover photo: Eastern gray treefrog by Tom R. Johnson issouri toads and frogs are colorful, harmless, vocal and valuable. Our forests, prairies, rivers, swamps and marshes are Mhome to a multitude of toads and frogs, but few people know how many varieties we have, how to tell them apart, or much about their natural history. Studying these animals and sharing their stories with fellow Missourians is one of the most pleasurable and rewarding aspects of our work. Toads and frogs are amphibians—a class Like most of vertebrate animals that also includes amphibians, salamanders and the tropical caecilians, which are long, slender, wormlike and legless. frogs and Missouri has 26 species and subspecies (or toads have geographic races) of toads and frogs. Toads and frogs differ from salamanders by having an aquatic relatively short bodies and lacking tails at adulthood. Being an amphibian means that tadpole stage they live two lives: an aquatic larval or tadpole and a semi- stage and a semi-aquatic or terrestrial adult stage. -
Check List 17 (1): 27–38
17 1 ANNOTATED LIST OF SPECIES Check List 17 (1): 27–38 https://doi.org/10.15560/17.1.27 A herpetological survey of Edith L. Moore Nature Sanctuary Dillon Jones1, Bethany Foshee2, Lee Fitzgerald1 1 Biodiversity Research and Teaching Collections, Department of Ecology and Conservation Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA. 2 Houston Audubon, 440 Wilchester Blvd. Houston, TX 77079 USA. Corresponding author: Dillon Jones, [email protected] Abstract Urban herpetology deals with the interaction of amphibians and reptiles with each other and their environment in an ur- ban setting. As such, well-preserved natural areas within urban environments can be important tools for conservation. Edith L. Moore Nature Sanctuary is an 18-acre wooded sanctuary located west of downtown Houston, Texas and is the headquarters to Houston Audubon Society. This study compared iNaturalist data with results from visual encounter surveys and aquatic funnel traps. Results from these two sources showed 24 species belonging to 12 families and 17 genera of herpetofauna inhabit the property. However, several species common in surrounding areas were absent. Combination of data from community science and traditional survey methods allowed us to better highlight herpe- tofauna present in the park besides also identifying species that may be of management concern for Edith L. Moore. Keywords Community science, iNaturalist, urban herpetology Academic editor: Luisa Diele-Viegas | Received 27 August 2020 | Accepted 16 November 2020 | Published 6 January 2021 Citation: Jones D, Foshee B, Fitzgerald L (2021) A herpetology survey of Edith L. Moore Nature Sanctuary. Check List 17 (1): 27–28. https://doi. -
Arizona Distribution of Three Sonoran Desert Anurans: Bufo Retiformis, Gastrophryne Olivacea, and Pternohyla Fodiens
Great Basin Naturalist Volume 56 Number 1 Article 5 1-31-1996 Arizona distribution of three Sonoran Desert anurans: Bufo retiformis, Gastrophryne olivacea, and Pternohyla fodiens Brian K. Sullivan Arizona State University West, Phoenix, Arizona Robert W. Bowker Glendale Community College, Glendale, Arizona Keith B. Malmos Arizona State University, Tempe Erik W. A. Gergus Arizona State University, Tempe Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Sullivan, Brian K.; Bowker, Robert W.; Malmos, Keith B.; and Gergus, Erik W. A. (1996) "Arizona distribution of three Sonoran Desert anurans: Bufo retiformis, Gastrophryne olivacea, and Pternohyla fodiens," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 56 : No. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol56/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Great Basin aturalist 56(1}, e 1996. pp. 38-47 ARIZONA DISTRIBUTION OF THREE SONORAN DESERT ANURANS, BUFO RETlFORMIS, GASTROPHRYNE OLIVACEA, AND PTERNOHYLA FOD/ENS Brian K. Sullivan1, Robert W Bowker2, Keith B. Malmos3, and Erik W A. Gergus3 ABSTRAGJ:-We surveyed historic collecting localities in south central Arizona during July; August, and September 1993-94 to determine the presence of 3 little-known Sonoran Desert anurans, Btifo retiformis, Gastrophryne oUvacea, and Ptemohyla fodiens. All 3 species were present at most historic localities visited under appropriate conditions (fol· lowing rainfall in July and August). -
Mutualism Between Frogs (Chiasmocleis Albopunctata, Microhylidae) and Spiders (Eupalaestrus Campestratus, Theraphosidae): a New Example from Paraguay
Alytes, 2021, 38 (1–4): 58–63. Mutualism between frogs (Chiasmocleis albopunctata, Microhylidae) and spiders (Eupalaestrus campestratus, Theraphosidae): a new example from Paraguay 1,* 2 Sebastien BASCOULÈS & Paul SMITH 1 Liceo Frances Internacional Marcel Pagnol, 971 Concordia, Asunción, Paraguay 2 FAUNA Paraguay, Encarnación, Paraguay, <www.faunaparaguay.com>; Para La Tierra, Centro IDEAL, Mariscal Estigarribia 321 c/ Tte. Capurro, Pilar, dpto. Ñeembucú, Paraguay, <[email protected]> * Corresponding author <[email protected]>. Commensal relationships between microhylid frogs and theraphosid spiders have been previously reported for a few species. Here we report the first example of this kind of relationship for two Paraguayan species, Chiasmocleis albopunctata (Microhylidae) and Eupalaestrus campestratus (Theraphosidae). Furthermore, we extend the known Paraguayan range of the former species by providing the first departmental records for Paraguarí and Guairá. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub: 52FBED11-A8A2-4A0E-B746-FD847BF94881 The possibility of commensal relationships between certain New World microhylid frogs and predatory ground spiders of the families THERAPHOSIDAE Thorell, 1869 and CTENIDAE Keyserling, 1877 was first alluded to by Blair (1936) who made brief remarks on the burrow-sharing relationship between Gastrophryne olivacea and Aphonopelma hentzi (THERAPHOSIDAE) in the southern prairies of North America, and this was further expanded upon by Hunt (1980), Dundee (1999) and Dundee et al. (2012). These authors noted that the frogs clearly benefitted from the presence of the spider with reduced predation, but were unable to determine any benefit for the spider. The phenomenon was later documented in the Neotropics, with a similar relationship between microhylid frogs (Chiasmocleis ventrimaculata and Hamptophryne boliviana) and the spider Xenesthis immanis reported from Peru (Cocroft & Hambler 1989; Csakany 2002; Miller 2003) and the former with Pamphobeteus sp. -
BOA5.1-2 Frog Biology, Taxonomy and Biodiversity
The Biology of Amphibians Agnes Scott College Mark Mandica Executive Director The Amphibian Foundation [email protected] 678 379 TOAD (8623) Phyllomedusidae: Agalychnis annae 5.1-2: Frog Biology, Taxonomy & Biodiversity Part 2, Neobatrachia Hylidae: Dendropsophus ebraccatus CLassification of Order: Anura † Triadobatrachus Ascaphidae Leiopelmatidae Bombinatoridae Alytidae (Discoglossidae) Pipidae Rhynophrynidae Scaphiopopidae Pelodytidae Megophryidae Pelobatidae Heleophrynidae Nasikabatrachidae Sooglossidae Calyptocephalellidae Myobatrachidae Alsodidae Batrachylidae Bufonidae Ceratophryidae Cycloramphidae Hemiphractidae Hylodidae Leptodactylidae Odontophrynidae Rhinodermatidae Telmatobiidae Allophrynidae Centrolenidae Hylidae Dendrobatidae Brachycephalidae Ceuthomantidae Craugastoridae Eleutherodactylidae Strabomantidae Arthroleptidae Hyperoliidae Breviceptidae Hemisotidae Microhylidae Ceratobatrachidae Conrauidae Micrixalidae Nyctibatrachidae Petropedetidae Phrynobatrachidae Ptychadenidae Ranidae Ranixalidae Dicroglossidae Pyxicephalidae Rhacophoridae Mantellidae A B † 3 † † † Actinopterygian Coelacanth, Tetrapodomorpha †Amniota *Gerobatrachus (Ray-fin Fishes) Lungfish (stem-tetrapods) (Reptiles, Mammals)Lepospondyls † (’frogomander’) Eocaecilia GymnophionaKaraurus Caudata Triadobatrachus 2 Anura Sub Orders Super Families (including Apoda Urodela Prosalirus †) 1 Archaeobatrachia A Hyloidea 2 Mesobatrachia B Ranoidea 1 Anura Salientia 3 Neobatrachia Batrachia Lissamphibia *Gerobatrachus may be the sister taxon Salientia Temnospondyls -
1704632114.Full.Pdf
Phylogenomics reveals rapid, simultaneous PNAS PLUS diversification of three major clades of Gondwanan frogs at the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary Yan-Jie Fenga, David C. Blackburnb, Dan Lianga, David M. Hillisc, David B. Waked,1, David C. Cannatellac,1, and Peng Zhanga,1 aState Key Laboratory of Biocontrol, College of Ecology and Evolution, School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510006, China; bDepartment of Natural History, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611; cDepartment of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Collections, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712; and dMuseum of Vertebrate Zoology and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 Contributed by David B. Wake, June 2, 2017 (sent for review March 22, 2017; reviewed by S. Blair Hedges and Jonathan B. Losos) Frogs (Anura) are one of the most diverse groups of vertebrates The poor resolution for many nodes in anuran phylogeny is and comprise nearly 90% of living amphibian species. Their world- likely a result of the small number of molecular markers tra- wide distribution and diverse biology make them well-suited for ditionally used for these analyses. Previous large-scale studies assessing fundamental questions in evolution, ecology, and conser- used 6 genes (∼4,700 nt) (4), 5 genes (∼3,800 nt) (5), 12 genes vation. However, despite their scientific importance, the evolutionary (6) with ∼12,000 nt of GenBank data (but with ∼80% missing history and tempo of frog diversification remain poorly understood. data), and whole mitochondrial genomes (∼11,000 nt) (7). In By using a molecular dataset of unprecedented size, including 88-kb the larger datasets (e.g., ref. -
Draft Environmental Assessment for The
DRAFT Environmental Assessment for the Renewable (Wind and Solar) Energy, Power Line, and Communication Tower Habitat Conservation Plan and Incidental Take Permit for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken LPC Conservation LLC Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas December 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arlington Ecological Services Field Office 2005 Northeast Green Oaks Boulevard, Suite 140 Arlington, Texas 76006 Estimated Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EA: $64,683.00 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RENEWABLE ENERGY, POWER LINE, AND COMMUNICATION TOWER PROPOSED HCP AND ITP FOR LESSER PRAIRIE-CHICKEN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND ...............................................................1 1.1 Introduction and Background ..................................................................................1 1.1.1 Permit Structure ...........................................................................................3 1.1.2 Plan Area and Permit Area ..........................................................................3 1.2 Regulatory Background ...........................................................................................3 1.2.1 Endangered Species Act ..............................................................................3 1.2.2 National Environmental Policy Act .............................................................4 2 PURPOSE AND NEED .......................................................................................................5 2.1 Purpose -
Species Risk Assessment
Ecological Sustainability Analysis of the Kaibab National Forest: Species Diversity Report Ver. 1.2 Prepared by: Mikele Painter and Valerie Stein Foster Kaibab National Forest For: Kaibab National Forest Plan Revision Analysis 22 December 2008 SpeciesDiversity-Report-ver-1.2.doc 22 December 2008 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 PART I: Species Diversity.............................................................................................................. 1 Species List ................................................................................................................................. 1 Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 2 Assessment Sources................................................................................................................ 3 Screening Results.................................................................................................................... 4 Habitat Associations and Initial Species Groups........................................................................ 8 Species associated with ecosystem diversity characteristics of terrestrial vegetation or aquatic systems ...................................................................................................................... -
Phylogeography, Species Distribution Modelling, Mitochondrial Genome Evolution and Conservation of the Fijian Frogs (Ceratobatrachidae )
PHYLOGEOGRAPHY, SPECIES DISTRIBUTION MODELLING, MITOCHONDRIAL GENOME EVOLUTION AND CONSERVATION OF THE FIJIAN FROGS (CERATOBATRACHIDAE ) by Tamara Osborne-Naikatini A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Copyright © 2015 by Tamara Osborne-Naikatini School of Biological and Chemical Sciences Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment The University of the South Pacific August 2015 DECLARATION Statement by the Author I, Tamara Osborne-Naikatini, declare that this thesis is my own work and that to the best of my knowledge, it contains no material previously published, or substantially overlapping with material submitted for the award of any degree at any institution, except where due acknowledgement is made in the text. Signature ……………………………………. Date ……………………………. Name ……………………………………………………………………………………... Student ID No ……………………………………………………………………….... Statement by Supervisor The research in this thesis was performed under my supervision and to my knowledge is the sole work of the Ms. Tamara Osborne-Naikatini. Signature ……………………………………. Date ……………………………. Name ……………………………………………………………………………………... Designation ………………………………………………………………………….... Dedication “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” Corinthians 13 Verses 11-13 (Saint James Bible) This thesis is dedicated to my late father, William Osborne… Daddy this is for you. i Acknowledgements I owe much to all the kind people who have supported me throughout the many years it took to birth this manuscript. -
Checklist of Species Within the CCBNEP Study Area: References, Habitats, Distribution, and Abundance
Current Status and Historical Trends of the Estuarine Living Resources within the Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program Study Area Volume 4 of 4 Checklist of Species Within the CCBNEP Study Area: References, Habitats, Distribution, and Abundance Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program CCBNEP-06D • January 1996 This project has been funded in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement #CE-9963-01-2 to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. The contents of this document do not necessarily represent the views of the United States Environmental Protection Agency or the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, nor do the contents of this document necessarily constitute the views or policy of the Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program Management Conference or its members. The information presented is intended to provide background information, including the professional opinion of the authors, for the Management Conference deliberations while drafting official policy in the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP). The mention of trade names or commercial products does not in any way constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use. Volume 4 Checklist of Species within Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program Study Area: References, Habitats, Distribution, and Abundance John W. Tunnell, Jr. and Sandra A. Alvarado, Editors Center for Coastal Studies Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi 6300 Ocean Dr. Corpus Christi, Texas 78412 Current Status and Historical Trends of Estuarine Living Resources of the Corpus Christi Bay National Estuary Program Study Area January 1996 Policy Committee Commissioner John Baker Ms. Jane Saginaw Policy Committee Chair Policy Committee Vice-Chair Texas Natural Resource Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6 Conservation Commission Mr. -
Texas Amphibian Watch Monitoring Packet
Nocturnal Roadside 19 Count Guidelines Frog and Toad Survey The Texas Frog and Toad Survey abundance across the United monitoring effort. And in the is part of the North American States as well as in Texas. Given process, we hope you have a safe, Amphibian Monitoring Program. your skills and dedication, we fun time getting to know the The data collected here is part of hope that you will be able to amphibians around you! a carefully-designed system whose monitor your route for many purpose is to assess whether there years and thus add even more are any trends in amphibian consistency and credibility to this Texas Frog and Toad Survey What you need to get started... is a partner with the North � this information sheet, plus a data sheet and map of your route location American Amphibian � a flashlight Monitoring Program (NAAMP) www.pwrc.usgs.gov/naamp � a clipboard and several pencils � a watch � a tape recorder and a blank tape for recording calls you do not know � an outdoor thermometer. Other gauges would be useful if available, including an anemometer (for measur ing wind speed), a hygrometer (for measuring relative humidity), and a barometer (for measuring barometric pressure). See data guidelines for suggestions regarding these measurements. � a resource for identifying frog and toad calls (see page 37) and a field guide for area amphibians Setting up the route... We provide you with a pre-selected water at some time. These wetlands map provided. While looking for starting point and a map of the will be your “listening posts” for the stops it is also important to make locality. -
Cheyenne Bottoms Reptiles and Amphibians
Amphibians FROGS & TOADS Great Plains Toad CHEYENNE Cheyenne Bottoms Wildlife Area is Anaxyrus cognatus home to at least nine species of Woodhouse’s Toad BOTTOMS amphibians. Additional species may Anaxyrus woodhousii occur at the Bottoms but have not yet Blanchard’s Cricket Frog been observed. Acris blanchardi The name "amphibian" comes from the Greek root words "amphi" meaning Boreal Chorus Frog "both" and "bios" meaning "life", which Pseudacris maculata refers to all amphibians' lifestyles of living Western Narrow-mouthed Toad Gastrophryne olivacea both in water and on land. While some WESTERN TIGER SALAMANDER amphibians can live away from water Plains Leopard Frog (terrestrial), they require water (aquatic) Lithobates blairi for at least part of their life cycle. American Bullfrog All Kansas amphibians deposit eggs Lithobates catesbeianus Reptiles,TurtlesReptiles,Turtles in water, which hatch into aquatic larvae. Plains Spadefoot && Toad and frog larvae are called tadpoles, Spea bombifrons salamanders are referred to as larva. Some salamander larvae can remain in AmphibiansAmphibians that stage for their entire lives, but most SALAMANDERS larvae (including tadpoles) eventually Western Tiger Salamander metamorphose (change) into adults. Ambystoma mavortium Adult frogs and salamanders tend to stay near water and have very thin, moist Thanks to Curtis Schmidt at the skin, while toads, with thicker, dry skin, Sternberg Museum of Natural History and can venture further from water. Frogs and Curtis Wolf at Kansas Wetland Education Center toads can be distinguished by their calls, for expertise in updating this list. and can be heard in the wetlands, PLAINS LEOPARD FROG Funded in part by your especially immediately after spring and hunting license dollars and Cheyenne Bottoms summer rains.