DOCSLIB.ORG

Giant Burrowing Frog-(Heleioporus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Giant Burrowing Frog-(Heleioporus #61 This Action Statement was first published in 1994 and remains current. This Giant Burrowing Frog version has been prepared for web publication. It Heleioporus australiacus retains the original text of the action statement, although contact information, the distribution map and the illustration may have been updated. © The State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2003 Published by the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria. Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus australiacus) Distribution in Victoria (DSE 2002) 8 Nicholson Street, (Illustration by John Las Gourgues) East Melbourne, Victoria 3002 Australia Description and Distribution coastal slopes of the Great Dividing Range The Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus below 1000 m altitude, between Gosford in This publication may be of New South Wales and Walhalla in central assistance to you but the australiacus Shaw & Nodder 1795) is a large, Gippsland. No records are known between State of Victoria and its robust species with a maximum body employees do not guarantee length of 100 mm. Body colour is chocolate Jervis Bay and Eden, indicating that the that the publication is brown above and white beneath with species may be composed of two disjunct without flaw of any kind or scattered yellow spots, usually capping populations. Gillespie (1990) gives a detailed is wholly appropriate for warts, on the flanks and around the cloaca. coverage of Victorian records since 1982. your particular purposes The back and sides are covered with small All Victorian records of the species have and therefore disclaims all warts each with a small black spine. The been from eucalypt forest of various types. liability for any error, loss There are no records from rainforest or ash- or other consequence which throat may be washed with brown and may dominated wet sclerophyll forest. The Giant may arise from you relying also have black spines, otherwise the on any information in this ventral surface is smooth and white. Burrowing Frog appears to use small flowing publication. In mature males, the girth of the forelimbs streams as breeding sites. Records of several usually exceeds the hindlimbs (never in individuals substantial distances from water ISSN 1448-9902 females). A series of black conical spines is indicate that the species uses a wide range of obvious on the first, and usually the second forested environments. The species appears and third fingers. The tympanum is distinct to be absent from cleared farmland and it and the pupil is vertical. The call is a low- may be dependant on aspects of forest pitched, owl-like 'ou-ou-ou'. More detailed habitats for feeding, sheltering and suitable descriptions of the Giant Burrowing Frog breeding sites. Four individuals have been are available in Lee (1967) and Cogger located at dams within forests but it is not (1992). known whether dams are used as breeding Records of this species are confined to the sites. Conservation Status To ensure the long-term conservation of all known populations Current Status of the Giant Burrowing Frog in Victoria. CNR 1993 Rare To conserve and manage the habitat of Giant Burrowing Frogs SAC (1991) Threatened at sites where they have been recorded. To attain greater understanding of the distribution, habitat, The Giant Burrowing Frog has been listed as a threatened abundance, breeding biology and general ecology of Giant taxon under Schedule 2 of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Burrowing Frogs and incorporate the information gained into Act 1988. all relevant CNR management plans. Reasons for Conservation Status Management Issues Within Victoria only 26 adult frogs, one juvenile frog and Significant areas of potential habitat for the Giant Burrowing three groups of tadpoles have been recorded at 24 localities Frog are within parks and reserves in Gippsland, however only (Atlas of Victorian Wildlife 1993) scattered over a large area two of the known records are within formal reserves (Snowy of central and eastern Gippsland. At the majority of sites River and Coopracambra National Parks). Four other records only a single adult has been found. have been incorporated into sites of significance from flora and During the last decade 25 flora and fauna surveys have fauna surveys in forest blocks in the East Gippsland Forest been conducted by CNR and its predecessors within the Management Area. Although not harvested under current known range of the Giant Burrowing Frog. Only nine practices, these sites are subject to review under the Forest individuals have been recorded during these surveys, Management Plan. Individually and collectively, these sites demonstrating the rarity of the species (Gillespie 1990). may not be large enough to ensure the species' long-term Given this level of survey effort it is unlikely that the lack of survival. records is simply due to an inability to detect the species, Information on species biology and population dynamics is not even with an animal as cryptic as the Giant Burrowing adequate to determine habitat requirements, impact of forest Frog. The species may prove to be widely spread at very management practices and status of existing populations. low densities or conversely to occur in small isolated Consequently definition of appropriate management strategies colonies. and prescriptions will involve a high degree of extrapolation Gillespie (1990) considered the Giant Burrowing Frog may from the ecology of other anuran species until such be adversely affected by current silvicultural practices and information is available. fuel reduction burning. These activities may damage Processes which threaten the species are those affecting potential breeding sites, diminish water quality and remove breeding sites such as changes to water flow and quality or to the litter and groundcover layers which harbour the streamside vegetation, or those affecting the wider forest species' food items. However, several individuals have environment, such as removal of litter from the forest floor or a recently been recorded near Nowa Nowa in a forest area combination of both. Such disturbances could include timber with a history of disturbance from harvesting and fuel harvesting and regeneration activities, road construction and reduction burning. Given the lack of knowledge of the maintenance, fuel reduction burning, weed invasion and species' habitat requirements it is inappropriate to re- subsequent herbicide spraying, and predation by exotic evaluate the effects of disturbance, particularly fuel species. reduction burning, at this stage. Consequently a Several individuals have been recorded long distances from conservative management strategy has been adopted. The waterbodies indicating that the species utilises, or at least research proposals contained in this action statement disperses through, forested areas between watercourses. should result in a better understanding of the frog's ecology Conservation of narrow buffers along streams is therefore and may allow modification of the management unlikely to provide adequately for all the frog's habitat prescriptions outlined in the Intended Management Action requirements and these buffers need to be connected to larger section. areas of reserved forest. Giant Burrowing Frogs use small flowing streams as Extractive mining upstream of breeding locations would breeding sites. Their tadpoles are likely to be adapted to the potentially conflict with the conservation of the species because natural fluctuations in stream flow, chemical composition of increased sediment inflow and possible chemical pollution and sediment yield of these streams. Fluctuations of stream of the stream. conditions caused by human activities such as timber harvesting and roading may not be within the tolerance Ecological Issues Specific to the Taxon ranges of these tadpoles resulting in reduced recruitment to The biology, distribution and habitat requirements of the Giant the adult population. Burrowing Frog are very poorly known. In its recommendation for listing under the Flora and Fauna The Victorian population is widely separated from the main Guarantee the Scientific Advisory Committee (1991) found NSW population centred around Sydney (Gillespie 1990) and that the Giant Burrowing Frog was very rare in terms of so will be managed as a separate entity. The status of the NSW abundance. population is currently under investigation but results are not yet available (M. Mahony pers. comm.). Most records from the Major Conservation Objectives Sydney area are from damp scrub and heath habitats on soils 2 derived from sandstone. This appears to differ from the these prescriptions would benefit any adults or tadpoles habitat types favoured in Victoria. present. The species is geographically isolated from congeneric All known Giant Burrowing Frog sites within the East species (the other five species of Heleioporus are found in Gippsland Forest Management Area have been included in the south-western Australia). The Giant Burrowing Frog differs planning process for delineation of Special Protection or from the rest of the genus in some important biological Special Management Areas under the Draft East Gippsland characters, notably time of breeding and habitat preference. Forest Management Plan. Research is difficult because of the dispersed nature of Survey records and the cryptic habits of the species. However a few Since 1983, CNR's ecological survey program has encompassed sites are known where it may be possible to study a number intensive surveys in a significant
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Amphibian Abundance and Detection Trends During a Large Flood in a Semi-Arid Floodplain Wetland
    Herpetological Conservation and Biology 11:408–425. Submitted: 26 January 2016; Accepted: 2 September 2016; Published: 16 December 2016. Amphibian Abundance and Detection Trends During a Large Flood in a Semi-Arid Floodplain Wetland Joanne F. Ocock1,4, Richard T. Kingsford1, Trent D. Penman2, and Jodi J.L. Rowley1,3 1Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, UNSW Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, 2052, Australia 2Centre for Environmental Risk Management of Bushfires, Institute of Conservation Biology and Environmental Management, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales 2522, Australia 3Australian Museum Research Institute, Australian Museum, 6 College St, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia 4Corresponding author, email: [email protected] Abstract.—Amphibian abundance and occupancy are often reduced in regulated river systems near dams, but com- paratively little is known about how they are affected on floodplain wetlands downstream or the effects of actively managed flows. We assessed frog diversity in the Macquarie Marshes, a semi-arid floodplain wetland of conserva- tion significance, identifying environmental variables that might explain abundances and detection of species. We collected relative abundance data of 15 amphibian species at 30 sites over four months, coinciding with a large natural flood. We observed an average of 39.9 ± (SE) 4.3 (range, 0-246) individuals per site survey, over 47 survey nights. Three non-burrowing, ground-dwelling species were most abundant at temporarily flooded sites with low- growing aquatic vegetation (e.g., Limnodynastes tasmaniensis, Limnodynastes fletcheri, Crinia parinsignifera). Most arboreal species (e.g., Litoria caerulea) were more abundant in wooded habitat, regardless of water permanency.
    [Show full text]
  • Threat Abatement Plan
    gus resulting in ch fun ytridio trid myc chy osis ith w s n ia ib h p m a f o n o i t THREAT ABATEMENTc PLAN e f n I THREAT ABATEMENT PLAN INFECTION OF AMPHIBIANS WITH CHYTRID FUNGUS RESULTING IN CHYTRIDIOMYCOSIS Department of the Environment and Heritage © Commonwealth of Australia 2006 ISBN 0 642 55029 8 Published 2006 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 Commonwealth, available from the Department of the Environment and Heritage. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to: Assistant Secretary Natural Resource Management Policy Branch Department of the Environment and Heritage PO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT 2601 This publication is available on the Internet at: www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/chytrid/ For additional hard copies, please contact the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Community Information Unit on 1800 803 772. Front cover photo: Litoria genimaculata (Green-eyed tree frog) Sequential page photo: Taudactylus eungellensis (Eungella day frog) Banner photo on chapter pages: Close up of the skin of Litoria genimaculata (Green-eyed tree frog) ii Foreword ‘Infection of amphibians with chytrid fungus resulting Under the EPBC Act the Australian Government in chytridiomycosis’ was listed in July 2002 as a key implements the plan in Commonwealth areas and seeks threatening process under the Environment Protection the cooperation of the states and territories where the and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). disease impacts within their jurisdictions.
    [Show full text]
  • Expert Witness Report
    Expert Witness Report Report prepared on instructions of: Bleyer Lawyers, Level 1, 550 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne, Vic 3000 Australia Prepared by: Graeme Gillespie B.Sc. Ph.D. 55 Union Street, Northcote, Vic 3070, Australia Curriculum Vitae Attached (Appendix I) I have read the Expert Witness Code of Conduct and agree to be bound by it. Graeme Gillespie 23 February 2010 Qualifications and Experience Please see my curriculum vitae (Appendix I) for my general qualifications and experience. My Ph.D. in zoology focussed specifically on the conservation biology and ecology of frog species in south-eastern Australia. I have 23 years of field and scientific experience studying amphibians and their conservation and management in south- eastern Australia. I have published 24 refereed scientific papers and 38 technical reports on amphibian ecology, conservation and management. I am recognised throughout Australia as an authority on the frog fauna of Victoria, specifically with respect to conservation issues, and I am regularly asked to provide advice on such matters to individuals, government conservation and land management agencies, and non-government organisations. With regard to the Giant Burrowing Frog, I encountered this species on several occasions between 1986 and 1992 while undertaking and supervising pre-logging biodiversity surveys in East Gippsland, Victoria. These records are documented in the Victorian Wildlife Atlas. During this period, I gained knowledge of the species’ habitat associations, breeding biology, some aspects of its behaviour and an appreciation of its conservation status in Victoria (see Opie et al. 1990; Westaway et al.1990; Lobert et al. 1991). Because of my research into amphibian conservation and management, I am highly familiar with the existing literature on the impact of various forest management activities on amphibians and the implications of these activities for amphibian conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania Regional Focus
    November 2011 Vol. 99 www.amphibians.orgFrogLogNews from the herpetological community Regional Focus Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania INSIDE News from the ASG Regional Updates Global Focus Recent Publications General Announcements And More..... Spotted Treefrog Nyctixalus pictus. Photo: Leong Tzi Ming New The 2012 Sabin Members’ Award for Amphibian Conservation is now Bulletin open for nomination Board FrogLog Vol. 99 | November 2011 | 1 Follow the ASG on facebook www.facebook.com/amphibiansdotor2 | FrogLog Vol. 99| November 2011 g $PSKLELDQ$UN FDOHQGDUVDUHQRZDYDLODEOH 7KHWZHOYHVSHFWDFXODUZLQQLQJSKRWRVIURP $PSKLELDQ$UN¶VLQWHUQDWLRQDODPSKLELDQ SKRWRJUDSK\FRPSHWLWLRQKDYHEHHQLQFOXGHGLQ $PSKLELDQ$UN¶VEHDXWLIXOZDOOFDOHQGDU7KH FDOHQGDUVDUHQRZDYDLODEOHIRUVDOHDQGSURFHHGV DPSKLELDQDUN IURPVDOHVZLOOJRWRZDUGVVDYLQJWKUHDWHQHG :DOOFDOHQGDU DPSKLELDQVSHFLHV 3ULFLQJIRUFDOHQGDUVYDULHVGHSHQGLQJRQ WKHQXPEHURIFDOHQGDUVRUGHUHG±WKHPRUH \RXRUGHUWKHPRUH\RXVDYH2UGHUVRI FDOHQGDUVDUHSULFHGDW86HDFKRUGHUV RIEHWZHHQFDOHQGDUVGURSWKHSULFHWR 86HDFKDQGRUGHUVRIDUHSULFHGDW MXVW86HDFK 7KHVHSULFHVGRQRWLQFOXGH VKLSSLQJ $VZHOODVRUGHULQJFDOHQGDUVIRU\RXUVHOIIULHQGV DQGIDPLO\ZK\QRWSXUFKDVHVRPHFDOHQGDUV IRUUHVDOHWKURXJK\RXU UHWDLORXWOHWVRUIRUJLIWV IRUVWDIIVSRQVRUVRUIRU IXQGUDLVLQJHYHQWV" 2UGHU\RXUFDOHQGDUVIURPRXUZHEVLWH ZZZDPSKLELDQDUNRUJFDOHQGDURUGHUIRUP 5HPHPEHU±DVZHOODVKDYLQJDVSHFWDFXODUFDOHQGDU WRNHHSWUDFNRIDOO\RXULPSRUWDQWGDWHV\RX¶OODOVREH GLUHFWO\KHOSLQJWRVDYHDPSKLELDQVDVDOOSUR¿WVZLOOEH XVHGWRVXSSRUWDPSKLELDQFRQVHUYDWLRQSURMHFWV ZZZDPSKLELDQDUNRUJ FrogLog Vol. 99 | November
    [Show full text]
  • Frogs of the Perth Region – Darling Range
    FROGS OF THE PERTH REGION Darling Range Eight species of frogs are found commonly along streams and in the many small swamps in the Darling Range east of Perth. All of these species breed during the wetter months between late autumn and early spring. B. Maryan D. Robinson Whooping Frog Crawling Toadlet Heleioporus inornatus Pseudophryne guentheri BUILD: stout round body and short limbs, BUILD: flattened body, small head and short males have black nuptial spine on first finger limbs LENGTH: maximum length 7cm LENGTH: maximum length 3.5cm LOOK FOR: uniformly copper brown back, LOOK FOR: ‘warty’ back mottled with browns flanks may be mottled with white, grey or and grey, belly blotchy with black on white yellow background, crawls BREEDING SEASON: late autumn BREEDING SEASON: winter MALE CALL: ‘whoop whoop whoop’ MALE CALL: short, sharp grating sound B. Maryan D. Robinson Sand Frog Western Spotted Frog Heleioporus psammophilus Heleioporus albopunctatus BUILD: robust body with short limbs, males BUILD: large with a robust build may have black nuptial spine on first finger LENGTH: maximum length 8.5cm LENGTH: maximum length 6cm LOOK FOR: white or yellow spots on LOOK FOR: back brown to dark grey. Pale chocolate brown body coloured bumps on lower flanks BREEDING SEASON: late autumn BREEDING SEASON: late autumn MALE CALL: short, high pitched ‘coo’ MALE CALL: high pitched trilling ‘purr’ D. Robinson D. Robinson Humming Frog Hooting Frog Neobatrachus pelobatoides Heleioporus barycragus BUILD: medium size, flat broad head, robust BUILD: males have massive front arms and with short legs black nuptial spine on first finger LENGTH: maximum length 4.5cm LENGTH: maximum length 9cm LOOK FOR: back patterns with base colour LOOK FOR: greyish to chocolate brown body of green or grey with darker green or brown with scattering of yellow spots on its flanks irregular patterns.
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial Ecology of the Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus Australiacus): Implications for Conservation Prescriptions
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Science - Papers (Archive) Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health January 2008 Spatial ecology of the giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus): implications for conservation prescriptions Trent D. Penman University of Wollongong, [email protected] F Lemckert M J Mahony Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers Part of the Life Sciences Commons, Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Penman, Trent D.; Lemckert, F; and Mahony, M J: Spatial ecology of the giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus): implications for conservation prescriptions 2008, 179-186. https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers/724 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Spatial ecology of the giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus): implications for conservation prescriptions Abstract Management of threatened anurans requires an understanding of a species’ behaviour and habitat requirements in both the breeding and non-breeding environments. The giant burrowing frog (Heleioporus australiacus) is a threatened species in south-eastern Australia. Little is known about its habitat requirements, creating difficulties in vde eloping management strategies for the species.Weradio-tracked 33 individual H. australiacus in order to determine their habitat use and behaviour. Data from 33 frogs followed for between 5 and 599 days show that individuals spend little time near (<15 >m) their breeding sites (mean 4.7 days for males and 6.3 days for females annually). Most time is spent in distinct non- breeding activity areas 20–250m from the breeding sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Balance of Field-Excavated Aestivating Australian Desert Frogs
    3309 The Journal of Experimental Biology 209, 3309-3321 Published by The Company of Biologists 2006 doi:10.1242/jeb.02393 Water balance of field-excavated aestivating Australian desert frogs, the cocoon- forming Neobatrachus aquilonius and the non-cocooning Notaden nichollsi (Amphibia: Myobatrachidae) Victoria A. Cartledge1,*, Philip C. Withers1, Kellie A. McMaster1, Graham G. Thompson2 and S. Don Bradshaw1 1Zoology, School of Animal Biology, MO92, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia and 2Centre for Ecosystem Management, Edith Cowan University, 100 Joondalup Drive, Joondalup, Western Australia 6027, Australia *Author for correspondence (e-mail: [email protected]) Accepted 19 June 2006 Summary Burrowed aestivating frogs of the cocoon-forming approaching that of the plasma. By contrast, non-cocooned species Neobatrachus aquilonius and the non-cocooning N. aquilonius from the dune swale were fully hydrated, species Notaden nichollsi were excavated in the Gibson although soil moisture levels were not as high as calculated Desert of central Australia. Their hydration state (osmotic to be necessary to maintain water balance. Both pressure of the plasma and urine) was compared to the species had similar plasma arginine vasotocin (AVT) moisture content and water potential of the surrounding concentrations ranging from 9.4 to 164·pg·ml–1, except for soil. The non-cocooning N. nichollsi was consistently found one cocooned N. aquilonius with a higher concentration of in sand dunes. While this sand had favourable water 394·pg·ml–1. For both species, AVT showed no relationship potential properties for buried frogs, the considerable with plasma osmolality over the lower range of plasma spatial and temporal variation in sand moisture meant osmolalities but was appreciably increased at the highest that frogs were not always in positive water balance with osmolality recorded.
    [Show full text]
  • National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes Balbus
    National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes balbus David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie Prepared by David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie (Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria). Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) Melbourne, October 2011. © State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2010 This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Authorised by the Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne. ISBN 978-1-74242-369-2 (online) This is a Recovery Plan prepared under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, with the assistance of funding provided by the Australian Government. This Recovery Plan has been developed with the involvement and cooperation of a range of stakeholders, but individual stakeholders have not necessarily committed to undertaking specific actions. The attainment of objectives and the provision of funds may be subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved. Proposed actions may be subject to modification over the life of the plan due to changes in knowledge. Disclaimer: This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence that may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. An electronic version of this document is available on the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts website www.environment.gov.au For more information contact the DSE Customer Service Centre 136 186 Citation: Hunter, D.
    [Show full text]
  • 2219573-REP-Marine Assessment Report AR
    Appendix L – Marine Assessment GHD | Report for Hunter Water Corporation - Belmont Drought Response Desalination Plant, 2219573 Hunter Water Corporation Belmont Drought Response Desalination Plant Marine Environment Assessment Amendment Report July 2020 Table of contents 1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and structure of this report .................................................................................... 2 2. Project changes ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Overview .............................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Key features of the amended Project .................................................................................. 4 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Review of relevant legislation .............................................................................................. 7 3.2 Review of databases and searches ..................................................................................... 7 3.3 Review of previous marine ecology reports ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Two Hundred and Ten Years Looking for the Giant Burrowing Frog
    Two hundred and ten years looking for the Giant Burrowing Frog 1 2 Trent Penman , Francis Lemckert and Michael Mahony' 'School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, N.S.W 2308,Australia 2Biodiversity Systems, Research and Development Division, Forests NSW P.O Box I 00 Beecroft, N.S.W 2119 Australia. Email for corresponding author: [email protected] The giant burrowing frog Heleioporusaustraliacus (Shaw) is a large, morphologically distinctive, but Downloaded fromhttp://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/32/4/597/1471522/az_2004_005.pdf by gueston26September2021 cryptic frog found in south eastern Australia. This paper reviews the literature pertaining to the Giant Burrowing Frog. It is a forest dependent species found on the coast and adjacent ranges of south-eastern Australia, with five congeners in south-west Western Australia. The species is listed as vulnerable in NSW and Victoria and under Commonwealth legislation, although there is no obvious cause for a decline nor is it clear how much decline has occurred. Proposed threats to the species survival include forestry operations, habitat destruction, introduced species, pollutants, increased UV and disease.A large gap exists in the species distributional records and H. australiacusmay represent two distinct species, although the evidence for this remains inconclusive. Standard detection methods for frogs do not apply well to the Giant Burrowing Frog and alternative methods are required to provide a more detailed understanding of its ecology and distribution. Key words: review, conservation, Heleioporus, management, amphibian Introduction Despite being one of the first frogs described from The review brings together all known records from various Australia, there has been very little research into museum specimens, the published literature and previous the ecology of the Giant Burrowing Frog Heleioporus collations of habitat requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • New Weapons in the Toad Toolkit: a Review of Methods to Control and Mitigate the Biodiversity Impacts of Invasive Cane
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316915049 New Weapons in the Toad Toolkit: A Review of Methods to Control and Mitigate the Biodiversity Impacts of Invasive Cane... Article in The Quarterly Review of Biology · June 2017 DOI: 10.1086/692167 CITATIONS READS 2 207 13 authors, including: Reid Tingley Robert J Capon University of Melbourne University of Queensland 47 PUBLICATIONS 1,042 CITATIONS 359 PUBLICATIONS 5,007 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Richard Shine University of Sydney 1,087 PUBLICATIONS 40,853 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Accounting for imperfect detection in environmental DNA surveys View project Novel P-glycoprotein substrates and inhibitors in application to Multidrug Resistance View project All content following this page was uploaded by Simon Clulow on 14 May 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Volume 92, No. 2 June 2017 THE QUARTERLY REVIEW of Biology NEW WEAPONS IN THE TOAD TOOLKIT: A REVIEW OF METHODS TO CONTROL AND MITIGATE THE BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS OF INVASIVE CANE TOADS (RHINELLA MARINA) Reid Tingley School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne Melbourne, Victoria 3010 Australia e-mail: [email protected] Georgia Ward-Fear School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney Sydney, New South Wales 2006 Australia e-mail: [email protected] Lin Schwarzkopf College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University Townsville, Queensland 4811 Australia e-mail: [email protected] Matthew J. Greenlees School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney Sydney, New South Wales 2006 Australia e-mail: [email protected] The Quarterly Review of Biology, June 2017, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Road Kill Monitoring Report
    Pacific Highway Upgrade Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Operational Road Kill Monitoring Report Roads and Maritime Services THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Document control Pacific Highway Upgrade Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Operational Road Report name Kill Monitoring Report Date 15 February 2019 Revision 1 Section 2A initial 12 week monitoring report Revision 2 Section 2A Autumn (April) 2018 monitoring report Revision 3 Section 2A Winter (July) 2018 monitoring report Revision 4 Section 2B initial 12 week monitoring report Revision 5 Annual report 2018 including Spring (October) 2018 monitoring Revision 6 Summer (January) 2019 monitoring report Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of this report .................................................................................................................................... 1 Appendix 1 WC2NH Road Kill Monitoring Program Appendix 2 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Stage 2A initial 12 week monitoring. Appendix 3 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2A Autumn (April) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 4 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2A Winter (July) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 5 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2B initial 12 week monitoring Appendix 6 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Annual report 2018 inc. Spring (October) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 7 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Summer (January) 2019 monitoring. Introduction Road kill monitoring is a requirement of the approved Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Koala, Spotted- tailed Quoll and Grey-headed Flying-fox management plans and the Ecological Monitoring Program. The aim of the monitoring program is to; • report on any animal road kill on the project following the opening to traffic; and • assess the effectiveness of the presence of fauna fencing to prevent fauna being killed by vehicles while attempting to cross the WC2NH Upgrade.
    [Show full text]