SWCHR Volume 2, Issue 3 BULLETINFall 2012

ISSN 2330-6025

Conservation - Preservation - Education - Public Information Research - Field Studies - Captive Propagation The SWCHR BULLETIN is published quarterly by the SOUTHWESTERN CENTER FOR HERPETOLOGICAL RESEARCH PO Box 624, Seguin TX 78156 www.southwesternherp.com email: [email protected] ISSN 2330-6025

OFFICERS 2010-2012 COMMITTEE CHAIRS

PRESIDENT COMMITTEE ON COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC Tom Lott NAMES Tom Lott VICE PRESIDENT Todd Hughes RANGE MAP COMMITTEE Tom Lott INTERIM SECRETARY Sara Lott AWARDS AND GRANTS COMMITTEE (vacant) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Gerald Keown COMMUNICATIONS COMMITEE Gerald Keown BOARD MEMBERS Toby Brock, Riley Campbell, Hans Koenig ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS COMMITTEE (vacant) BULLETIN EDITOR Chris McMartin NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE Gerald Keown

ABOUT SWCHR EDUCATION COMMITTEE Sara Lott Originally founded by Gerald Keown in 2007, SWCHR is a 501(c) (3) non-profit association, governed by a board of directors and MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE dedicated to promoting education of the Association’s members Toby Brock and the general public relating to the natural history, biology, tax- onomy, conservation and preservation needs, field studies, and captive propagation of the herpetofauna indigenous to the Ameri- CONSERVATION COMMITTEE can Southwest. (vacant)

THE SWCHR LOGO JOINING SWCHR

There are several versions of the SWCHR logo, all featuring the For information on becoming a member please visit the member- Gray-Banded (Lampropeltis alterna), a widely-recognized ship page of the SWCHR web site at native to the Trans-Pecos region of Texas as well as adjacent http://www.southwesternherp.com/join.html. Mexico and New Mexico.

ON THE COVER: Speckled Kingsnake, Lampropeltis getula holbrooki, Brazoria County, TX (Matt Hollanders). This photograph was voted the winner of the 2011 ©2012 Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research. The SWCHR Bul- SWCHR Award for Excellence in Herpetological Photography. letin may not be reproduced in whole or in part on any web site or in any other publication without the prior explicit written consent of the Southwestern Center BACKGROUND IMAGE: Elephant Tusk, Big Bend National Park, TX (Chris for Herpetological Research and of the respective author(s) and photographer(s). McMartin) SWCHR Bulletin 1 Fall 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS

A Message from the President, Tom Lott 2

A Pattern Mutation in Thornscrub Ratsnakes, Pantherophis guttatus (syn. emoryi) meahllmorum 3 (Serpentes: ), Toby Brock

South Texas Breeding Trials for Arizona Mountain , Lampropeltis pyromelana pyromelana 4 (Serpentes: Colubridae), John Lassiter

Book Review: Texas Amphibians: A Field Guide, Tom Lott 6

Geographic Distribution Note: Terrapene ornata ornata (Testudines: Emydidae), Tom Lott 8

A CALL FOR PAPERS

Are you a field herpetologist or a herpetoculturist working with species native to the American Southwest? Do you have a paper or an article you have written for which you would like to find a permanent repository? Want to be assured you will always be able to share it with the world? Submit it to the SWCHR Bulletin for possible publication. Submitted manuscripts from SWCHR members, as well as non-members, will be considered.

To be accepted for publication, submissions must deal with herpetological species native to the American Southwest. Such topics as field notes, county checklists, range extensions, , reproduction and breeding, diseases, bite and venom research, captive breeding and maintenance, conservation issues, legal issues, etc. are all acceptable. For assistance with formatting manuscripts, search ‘scientific journal article format’ on the internet and tailor the resultant guidance to suit.

Previously published articles or papers are acceptable, provided you still hold the copyright to the work and have the right to re-publish it. If we accept your paper or article for publication, you will still continue to be the copyright holder. If your submission has been previously published, please provide the name of the publication in which it appeared along with the date of publication. All submissions should be manually proofed in addition to being spell checked and should be submitted by email as either Microsoft Word or text documents.

Send submissions to [email protected]. SWCHR Bulletin 2 Fall 2012 A Message from the President

Virtually everyone who is involved in herping at any level has at some time likely been constrained by legal regulations emanating from all levels of governance, from the federal government all the way down to local homeowners’ associations. All too frequently many of these regulations seem to be ill-informed, unnecessary, prejudiced, and occasionally even downright quixotic. Conspiracy theories aside, there are actually a number of radical “ rights” groups (especially PETA and HSUS) that actively lobby local governments even to the extent of providing them with templates for ordinances that seek to restrict existing privileges enjoyed by pet owners, including herpers.

At last June’s Sanderson Snake Days event there was a palpable sense that prospects for improving the strained relations between herpers and law enforcement, particularly at the state level, might be at hand. In a continuation of that theme, and in conjunction with the long- standing East Texas Herpetological Society (ETHS) annual Fall Conference and Expo, there will be an inaugural Reptile and Amphibian Law Symposium and Workshop, sponsored by a partnership among the National Reptile and Amphibian Advisory Council (NRAAC), the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), the Association of Reptile and Amphibian Veterinarians (ARAV), and the ETHS. This event will be held concurrently with and at the same venue as the ETHS Conference (Crowne Plaza Houston Northwest - 12801 Northwest Freeway, Houston, Texas 77040).

Events associated with the Law Symposium will consist mainly of panel discussions of various topics (listed here: http://nraac.org/index. html) taking place from 8:00 AM until 5:00 PM each day (Friday, 28 September and Saturday, 29 September). SWCHR’s Executive Director, Gerald Keown, will be a panelist on the State Laws—Native Species discussion, along with Dr. Andy Gluesenkamp and several others, on Saturday morning at 8:00 AM. The ETHS Conference will also have a series of speaker presentations occurring simultaneously on Saturday (list here: http://eths.org/), so attendees of both events will have to pick and choose on that day. Of course the usually excellent ETHS Expo will take place on Sunday, beginning at 11:00 AM.

Participation in the ETHS event does require a registration and fees (listed on their website above), but for the Herp Law Symposium registration is free and easily accomplished online (http://nraac.org/register/index.php). When registering, you may also avail yourself of the opportunity to request more information, volunteer to work at the event, and/or volunteer to serve as a panelist. Hoping to see you there!

Happy herping, SWCHR Bulletin 3 Fall 2012

A Pattern Mutation in Thornscrub Ratsnakes, more reverse-striped, two were quite aberrantly patterned, but not reverse-striped, and five were more normally patterned. Sexual Pantherophis guttatus (syn. emoryi) meahllmorum ratios for this clutch are: 2.3 normally patterned, 0.2 aberrantly (Serpentes: Colubridae) patterned, and 3.1 reverse-striped. by Toby Brock I plan to raise at least one pair of the reverse-striped offspring and A particular pattern mutation which is sometimes seen in the the aberrant offspring to breed back to each other in the future. We Thornscrub Rat Snake (Pantherophis guttatus meahllmorum)1 is known know very little of this pattern mutation, but we feel we may learn as reverse-striping, which is characterized by a mid-dorsal stripe more in the future, once reverse-striped offspring are bred back to of the animal’s ground color cutting through the normal blotched each other. One theory, held by John Lassiter (pers. comm.), is that dorsal pattern. This mutation has been found in wild specimens this mutation may be polymorphic in nature and this could be the at least twice, to my knowledge, in different locales. K. J. Lodrigue reason it expresses to variable degrees. had reverse-striped meahllmorum which originated from Duval 1 County, Texas, and Todd Hughes found and collected a large Also known as the Southwestern Rat Snake (Elaphe emoryi meahllmorum) Dixon and Werler, 2005; and Elaphe guttata meahllmorum, Werler and Dixon, 2000. adult male reverse-striped specimen in Robstown, Nueces County, Texas. Lodrigue states on his website, KJUN Snakehaven, that this References mutation is heritable, but in what way is unknown; and it is not a simple recessive gene which produces it. The mutation expresses Dixon, James R. and John E. Werler. 2005. Texas : A Field extremely variably, and all specimens we have seen have had at Guide. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, pp. 142-143. least a blotch or two crossing the mid-dorsal stripe; other pattern aberrancies are often present as well. The ventrum on reverse- Lodrigue, K.J. and Kasi E. Russell-Lodrigue, DVM, PhD. Reverse striped specimens is often devoid, or nearly so, of the normal Striped Emory Ratsnake (Elaphe emoryi var. meahllmorum)–South pattern of small, dark blotches. Texas Line. OTHER CORNSNAKES & RATSNAKES. KJUN Snakehaven [http://www.kjun.us/index1.htm]. Accessed 14 In spring 2009 Todd Hughes, Terry Cox, and I decided to try to September 2012. reproduce this mutation in captivity, using Hughes’s wild collected male; a captive produced reverse-striped female owned by Cox, Werler, John E. and James R. Dixon. 2000. Texas Snakes: Identification, which was produced by K. J. Lodrigue; and a normally patterned Distribution, and Natural History. Austin, Texas: University of Texas wild collected female, from the Bluntzer area of Nueces County, Press, pp. 113-116. which was in my collection.

All three snakes were housed in a tub rack, and I paired the male with both females several times each. Both females became heavily gravid, although the reverse-striped female was not able to pass her clutch, becoming egg-bound and requiring veterinary treatment to remove the eggs. None of the eggs were viable at the time they were removed, and the female suffered extreme damage to one of her oviducts. The veterinarian who treated her, Tim Tristan, stated that it would be dangerous for her to become gravid again, so this ended her breeding career.

The normally patterned long-term captive Nueces County locale female in my collection laid a clutch of fourteen large, good eggs on May 25, 2009, all of which hatched in mid-August 2009. She laid a second clutch of ten good eggs and three infertile eggs on July 29, 2009. All good eggs went on to hatch out healthy neonates in late October 2009. None of the offspring were reverse-striped, but some had minor pattern aberrancies. I kept and raised one pair September 2012 Pantherophis guttatus meahllmorum clutch including several reverse- of the offspring for future breeding attempts. striped hatchlings. Photo by Toby Brock.

In spring 2012 I paired up the 2009 offspring for breeding, and the 2009 male also with his dam. The older female laid a clutch of sixteen good eggs on May 31, 2012, and the younger female laid a clutch of eleven good eggs on June 21, 2012. The older female’s clutch hatched in mid-August, 2012. None of the offspring of this clutch were reverse-striped, although several had longer than usual neck striping. The younger female’s clutch hatched in early September 2012. Four of these offspring were 50% or SWCHR Bulletin 4 Fall 2012

South Texas Breeding Trials for Arizona thought and still think a double homozygote (hypomelanistic/ hypoerythristic) morph would be a stunning animal. Reduced black Mountain Kingsnakes, Lampropeltis pyromelana and reduced red should look very interesting on a tricolor in my pyromelana (Serpentes: Colubridae) opinion. When this pair arrived they were rather small and thin for by John Lassiter their age and for my preference, so I began to get some weight/size on them for a 2010 winter brumation and 2011 breeding. These After years of successfully breeding numerous colubrids including two have always been finicky feeders, especially the female, and it the somewhat difficult mexicana complex (L. m. mexicana, L. m. has been difficult to get them conditioned for successful breeding. leonis “thayeri,” L. m. greeri, L. alterna and L. ruthveni) here in hot I will refer to these as my multi-heterozygous pair. and humid South Texas, I thought I should try my hand with other snakes from higher elevations. So, in 2008 I decided to build an “Applegate Special” and Heterozygous Pair Arizona mountain kingsnake collection, then move to my favorites, L. zonata, after I had a few pyromelana clutches under my belt. I Later in August of 2009 I attended the Daytona Beach, Florida want to prove to myself that these mountain kings can thrive and National Reptile Breeders Expo (NRBE) and found a stunning reproduce in captivity in South Texas prior to moving onto zonata. adult pair of “Applegate Special” pyromelana. These very reduced I managed to acquire some great breeding stock prior to the winter black Patagonia locale pyromelana were first produced by Bob of 2010 for the 2011 breeding season. This article is a discussion Applegate. The female is a visual “Special” and the male is a of what I managed to accomplish and learn with my initial breeding stunning heterozygote with nice black crossovers. Both of these attempts over the past two years. are great feeders and were great candidates for a 2010 brumation to be paired up during the 2011 breeding season.

Future Breeders

Over these past few years I also managed to acquire a few more pyromelana in hopes of pairing them up with the adult stock I acquired and their offspring in the future. These include a pair of “High Black” and a heterozygous-for-amelanistic female.

2010/2011 Brumation, Breeding and 2011 Results

To successfully produce captive-bred Arizona mountain kings the next step was to condition these serpents for future breeding. I followed a proven “recipe” I developed for all my colubrids, including my other higher-elevation snakes from West Texas and Arizona Mountain Kingsnake, Lampropeltis pyromelana pyromelana. Photo by John south of the border. Many times I hear or read that other Arizona Lassiter. mountain kingsnake keepers across the nation have pyromelana that “shut down” for the winter. I have yet to notice any of my L. p. pyromelana automatically go off feed. I have to force cool Baubel Line Pair temperatures on them, especially since our South Texas winters are so mild, and I have to stop feeding them a month prior to brumating In early 2008 I purchased my first pair of Arizona mountain them. I believe it is not possible to ever naturally brumate pyromelana kingsnakes (L. p. pyromelana) for breeding purposes from a breeder/ with the South Texas winter temperatures. friend of mine in the Bay Area of California. These kings are from Chris Baubel’s popular Patagonia line of pyromelana that had In late October of 2010, as I always have, I offered all of my breeding reduced black/high white pattern. The male is stunning reduced colubrids their last meal prior to dropping the ambient temperature. white, while the female has a “classic” look to her. While working In mid October I partitioned off my snake room with a Styrofoam there I raised these two kings rather quickly as they were the only insulation wall and created a “brumation chamber.” This chamber snakes I was keeping while “on the road.” After their first couple contained the 24,000 BTU window unit air conditioner. I set the of months they were taking “crawler” mice every few days. By the digital thermostat on the unit to 60o Fahrenheit. This is the lowest time I got back home to South Texas in late 2009 they were almost it can be set, but I’ve rigged the digital sensor with a small heat pad large enough to brumate for a 2010 pairing, but I decided to wait and have adjusted the sensor’s distance from the heat source so until 2011 to pair them up. that the unit will over-cool down into the high 40s and low 50s. I have been doing this for over a decade and have had great success Possible Double-Heterozygous Pair with my other higher-elevation kingsnakes (mainly Nuevo Leon, gray-banded, and San Luis Potosi kingsnakes). In mid November I In mid 2009 I purchased an interesting pair of pyromelana from turned off all supplemental heat and paired up the three pairs in 3 a “pyro guru.” This sexual pair is definitely heterozygous for separate enclosures while at room temperatures (72o F). A week later Sentz Line Hypomelanism (Reduced black pigment) and possibly I placed them in the brumation chamber that was holding around heterozygous for Hypoerythrism (Reduced red pigment). I SWCHR Bulletin 5 Fall 2012

55o F. The brumation period started just before Thanksgiving and digest most of the time. I believe that the unnecessary heat killed they were kept at or around 55o F until mid-February. the males’ viable sperm. I also think that once the female was inseminated, they could kill viable sperm while using the hot spot. In mid February I removed the Styrofoam insulation partition and The males did not have great caloric intake since they were in with let the area where the chamber once stood gradually warm up to the females up to the females’ pre-egg-laying shed. This may have room temperature over a period of a week. After all of my breeder had something to do with infertility as well. colubrids acclimated to room temperatures, I turned on their supplemental heat and provided their normal 85o F hot spot while I also think the brumation duration from mid-November to keeping the room at or around 72o F. After providing the hot spot mid-February may have been too short and/or not cool enough, I then started feeding the females at least twice a week, or whenever especially when comparing the brumation temperatures and they were on the cool side of the enclosure conserving. All of the duration I provided to the low temperatures in their natural range males refused to eat normal-sized prey during this time but would, and the duration of those low temperatures. On a side note, most on rare occasions, take small fuzzy mice. The males seemed to of my L. m. mexicana and L. m. thayeri laid fertile eggs, but many of follow the females where ever they would go in the enclosures. my L. ruthveni did not. After the females ate, they would remain under the aspen bedding on the hot spot for a couple of days, then return to the cool side of With all of that information, I decided to make a few adjustments the enclosure. The male would always be with the female as if he for the next winter’s brumation and the 2012 breeding season. With was just waiting for the females to ovulate. my theory that high temperatures killed the male’s viable sperm I decided to not provide supplemental heat for my breeding pairs. Before the female’s “pre-ovulation shed” two of the females were I also decided to brumate them together again, but I wanted to receptive to the males’ advances. I witnessed the “Applegate Special” drop their temperatures a week or so earlier on the front end of pair copulate on two occasions prior to the female’s first shed out brumation and keep them cooled for a week or so longer. of brumation. I also witnessed the possible multi-heterozygous pair copulate once. I did not see the Baubel line pair copulate at all, nor even try. After the females all shed, I witnessed them lock with their mates many times. The Baubel male was not trying to breed so I paired the Baubel female up with the multi-heterozygous male. They had successful locks numerous times. I kept that trio (multi- heterozygous male, Baubel female and the multi-heterozygous female) and the “Applegate Special” pair together all the way up to the females’ “pre-egg-laying” shed. When I saw the females starting to go into their shed cycle I removed the males, gave each of the females their own enclosure and provided nest sites for the noticeably gravid females. Based on many articles I’ve read and conversations I’ve had with Robert Applegate and Frank Retes, I offered the “in the blue” females smaller meals throughout their shed cycle. All took them readily except the multi-heterozygous female, which rarely ate during her shed cycle.

The Baubel female shed first. With my setup and nesting provisions, eggs are typically laid less than 10 days after the pre- egg-laying shed—at day 15 I began to worry. In the meantime the Female L. p. pyromelana from Chris Baubel’s Patagonia line. Photo by John Lassiter. multi-heterozygous female shed and laid 4 infertile eggs. I palpated the Baubel female many times and thought I felt eggs, but she Breeding & Results in 2012 never laid any. She must have reabsorbed her egg follicles because after a few days I could not feel any follicles or eggs in her. The In late February 2012 I warmed up all my colubrids up to room Applegate female took the longest to shed, but four days later she temperature (72o Fahrenheit) and commenced feeding as I have in laid a clutch of 5 infertile eggs. In hopes to get a fertile clutch I fed the past. Again, many of the males did not accept prey, including the females heavily, paired them back up with their previous mates my L. p. pyromelana males, but they would eat smaller prey items and witnessed a few more copulations. All this yielded was another on occasion. All the females fed on offered prey readily with the clutch of 4 infertile eggs from the multi-heterozygous female and exception of the multi-heterozygous female, who ate intermittently nothing from the Baubel female or the Applegate female. but kept a good breeding weight and appeared visually healthy. Prior to the female’s pre-ovulation shed I did not witness any copulation, Conclusions for the 2011 Season but that does not rule out the possibility that it occurred. After the female’s pre-ovulation shed I noticed my “Applegate Special” pair I believe the females did their job by producing follicles, then eggs, “hooked up” but I never witnessed the other two pairs breeding. but the males must have had unviable sperm. The males were Again, this doesn’t mean they did not breed. It seemed like the following the females over to the hot side and they had no prey to males became habituated to the females and were never prompted SWCHR Bulletin 6 Fall 2012

to copulate. The results for this year were just as dismal as the year prior. All my Arizona mountain kingsnakes laid infertile eggs, as did many of my Nuevo Leon and San Luis Potosi kings, since I made this adjustment globally for my entire breeding collection. Also, none of my females double-clutched either.

Preparing for 2013

After a second year of reproductive failure I decided to go back to the “old school” way of breeding colubrids set forth by such pioneer breeders like Ernie Wagner and others. This is a method I have used for many years with somewhat good results. All my adjustments to date were to assist with my L. m. thayeri and L. m. mexicana reproduction.

Currently, every colubrid in my collection is housed separately. They will be brumated in this manner as well. The brumation period will be from mid-November until late February. When spring arrives and the potential breeders are brought out of brumation I will provide supplemental heat in hopes that the temperatures will assist with better egg follicle and egg development.

I have also noticed that the males eat better during the breeding season when not housed with the females. Caloric intake may help with viable sperm, but this is only a theory of mine. Housing and brumating separately, along with supplemental heat, a thermal gradient, and providing the males an increase in caloric intake should eliminate all the variables that have hindered my L. p. Book Review: Texas Amphibians: A Field Guide pyromelana from successfully reproducing in captivity for me. by Bob L. Tipton, Terry L. Hibbitts, Toby J. Hibbitts, Troy D. Hibbitts, and Travis J. LaDuc. Conclusion Austin: University of Texas Press: Austin, 2012. Many write about their successful breeding attempts with captive Softcover. 325 pp. $24.95. animals, but I wanted to discuss my failed breeding attempts with ISBN 978-0-292-73735-8 L. p. pyromelana over the past two years. I’d like to believe I have Review by Tom Lott learned from my mistakes and from the animals themselves. I also think I have made corrections to my husbandry techniques that will The most basic function of a field guide consists merely of aid- yield success next year. I hope to write a follow-up article to this ing the reader in identifying organisms in question. In general, the one recording my successes with these incredible colubrids. wider the scope of any field guide, the less auxiliary information it will be able to include in a format intended to actually be carried into the field; a field guide restricted to only the amphibians of a single, albeit very large, state, however, should be able to provide more supplementary information than one encompassing all of the herps of the United States. The current volume does not disap- point in that respect.

This book is a collaboration between three “amateur” (in the sense that Lawrence Klauber was an amateur!) and two professional her- petologists, all of whom have vast experience with Texas herps. The lead author, Bob Tipton, sadly passed away in 2010 due to cancer, but he doubtless would have been pleased that the collec- tive authors’ efforts have finally reached fruition. It is the seventh volume in the University of Texas Press’ Texas Natural History Guides and the third dealing with herpetological subjects (Dixon and Werler’s 2005 Texas Snakes: A Field Guide and the late Andy “Applegate Spceial” Lampropeltis pyromelana pyromelan. Photo by John Lassiter. Price’s 2009 Venomous Snakes of Texas: A Field Guide are the oth- ers). One can hope that these are followed by similar works on the turtles and lizards. SWCHR Bulletin 7 Fall 2012

In its physical dimensions, Texas Amphibians measures 7.5” X 4.8” Department lists is given. Where major environmental threats are (19 cm X 12.2 cm), the same as other works in the series, keeping recognized for a particular species, they are mentioned in this sec- with the notion that the book might occasionally actually be used in tion. the field. Its covers are composed of a flexible, plastic-feeling mate- rial that appears to be quite durable, and its pages are actually sewn Taxonomic arrangements and common names used by the authors onto a cloth spine rather than being merely held in place by glue. generally follow those endorsed by the combined national herp so- cieties (Crother 2008) with three notable exceptions, which are ex- The previous work to which this new book will most likely be com- plained in the introduction: 1) the genus Syrrhophus is conservative- pared is the out-of-print Gulf Publishing Company’s A Field Guide ly retained for the chirping frogs (rather than lumping them with to Texas and Amphibians, by the indefatigable R.D. and Pa- Eleutherodactylus) on the contention that they represent a distinct tricia P. Bartlett (1999). That work covered 73 taxa of amphibians group more closely related to each other than to other members of (including subspecies) to a similar level of textual detail, beyond the newly erected family Eleutherodactylidae; 2) citing reservations mere identification (and also included turtles and lizards). The cur- about the mitochondrial DNA data used in several recent studies rent work covers 72 species of amphibians (thanks mainly to the that variously split up the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata) description of several new species of neotenic salamanders); sub- complex, Pseudacris feriarum is retained as a more conservative op- species, where they exist, are listed in the species account, but are tion for the Texas populations of the complex rather than accept- not described, illustrated, nor shown in the range maps. ing the newly described Cajun Chorus Frog (Pseudacris fouquettei); 3) considering the taxonomic status of the sirens of the Lower Rio The most basic function of the field guide—identification—is first Grande Valley to be currently unresolved, the authors chose to list addressed by the inclusion of dichotomous keys that are somewhat them as merely Siren sp. Also, the recent splitting of several large, modified versions (updated and with improved illustrations) of cosmopolitan genera such as Rana and Bufo are accommodated by those included in James R. Dixon’s (2000) work, and will generally placing the older, more familiar name within brackets (e.g., Anaxy- take the user to the species level of classification for most speci- rus [Bufo] speciosus for the Texas Toad). mens (Dixon’s original keys included diagnosis to the subspecies level). At least nine of the endemic Edwards Plateau neotenic sala- The range maps are of the shaded area type and are rendered more manders, however, are diagnosed in the keys by referring to their detailed by their plotting over a county outline base map. In gen- geographic origin, rather than to anatomical distinctions, a problem eral, the maps tend to be somewhat less conservative than those in encountered more frequently in modern field guides due to the in- the snake field guide (Dixon and Werler 2005), but are lacking the creasing tendency of taxonomists to describe new “cryptic” species surface detail of those in that work. The map for the Rio Grande based solely on genetic differences impossible to determine in the Chirping Frog, for example, plots three northwesterly populations field (doubtless even experts on the taxonomy of this group would (two of which have not yet been published in the literature) as be- be hard-pressed to visually identify some species in the absence of ing isolated from the remainder of this invasive frog’s distribution, locality data). Also included is a brief key to the genera of most which is depicted as contiguous. The distribution maps in this vol- Texas amphibians that include a free-living larval stage in their de- ume are, however, perhaps the most accurate ones currently avail- velopment. able in their size and format, and comprise a vast improvement over those provided in Bartlett and Bartlett (1999). In most cases, however, I suspect the casual user of a field guide wishes to arrive at an identification primarily by consulting the illus- Somewhat surprisingly, the general topic of anuran acoustics is trations. In this respect, Texas Amphibians is quite accommodating, given only a single paragraph in the introduction, although each at least in those situations where this is possible. There are typically species account contains a brief attempt to verbally describe the two or three photographs in each of the species accounts, depict- species’ call. As with birds and birding, attention to the calls of ing variation in coloration, ontology, and geographic origin of the frogs and toads adds an entirely new dimension to the experience, specimen (which is provided, by county, for each photo). The pho- and also allows for the documentation of species that might not tographs are of consistently very high quality (presumably mostly be easily observed and/or those that are in inaccessible areas. Ad- taken by the authors; there are no photo credits in the book save ditionally, some museums and databases now accept unequivocal for a list of people who provided “additional photos” in the Ac- recordings of anuran calls as vouchers for a species’ presence in a knowledgments) and are reproduced in a format that is gratifyingly given locality. Many citizen-science amphibian monitoring projects larger than one finds in many such guides. There is also a very brief, will also require at least a passing familiarity with local amphibian but well-done, section in the introduction regarding techniques for calls before granting full participation in the effort. photographing amphibians. Separate indices are provided for common and scientific names Each species account includes the following topics: size, descrip- only, but most other general topics must be located within the con- tion, voice (for anurans), similar species, distribution, natural histo- tents section for the 40-page introduction. There is a six-page glos- ry, reproduction, and comments and conservation. This last section sary at the end of the book and a brief bibliography is provided. is where the conservation status of each species is discussed, along Appendix A lists six hypothetical species (two salamanders and four with the authors’ comments on the species within the state. If the frogs) that may potentially be found in Texas. Some may have once taxon is not on the state Threatened & Endangered (T&E) list, its occurred within the state but are now considered extirpated (e.g., standing on either the “white” or “black” Texas Parks and Wildlife Lithobates [Rana] pipiens), others are found nearby in adjacent states SWCHR Bulletin 8 Fall 2012

(e.g., Hyla avivoca), some are invasives (e.g., Eleutherodactylus planiros- GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION tris and Osteopilus septentrionalis) that are easily introduced into semi- tropical areas via the potted plant trade (the former now appears to TERRAPENE ORNATA ORNATA (Ornate Box Turtle). Texas: be established in Galveston County). Kleberg County: FM 771, 2.54 Km E US Hwy 77 (N 27.295578, W 97.790362; elev. 8.8 m). 10 November 2006. Tom Lott and Sara Appendix B consists of resources recommended to the reader who Lott. NAFHA photo voucher 55906. New county record (Dixon desires further information about the amphibians of Texas. Re- 2000. Amphibians and Reptiles of Texas, 2nd Ed. Texas A&M Press. grettably, SWCHR is not listed among the several herp societies College Station. 421 pp.). Specimen was found crossing road in (some of which appear to be defunct or moribund), nor is it among a sandy agricultural field/Tamualipan thornscrub habitat. - Tom the (only) three “helpful” websites recommended. Also remark- Lott, SWCHR, P.O. Box 624, Seguin, TX 78156 (e-mail: tom.lott@ ably, I could find no mention in the book of the Texas Parks and swchr.org) Wildlife Department’s own citizen-science effort relating specifi- cally to amphibians, Texas Amphibian Watch [http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/wildlife_diversity/ texas_nature_trackers/amphibian_watch/].

Regardless of these minor criticisms, Texas Amphibians: A Field Guide is a long-awaited and very welcome addition to the growing herpetological literature of Texas. Its treatment of the endemic Edwards Plateau spring salamanders alone is likely the best cur- rently available in a popular resource. I am sure I will be consulting this volume frequently and, consequently, it occupies a highly acces- sible space on my bookshelf. Perhaps the only recommendation I would make would be for the reader who is seriously interested in amphibians would be to supplement this guide with either TPWD’s own CD of frog calls (see the Texas Amphibian Watch link above), proceeds from which benefit the Non-Game Division, or obtain Elliott et al.’s The Frogs and Toads of North America (2009) picture book of the anuran species north of the Mexican border, which contains an excellent CD of virtually all US frog and toad calls (the CD by itself is worth the purchase price).

Literature Cited

Bartlett, R.D. and Patricia P. Bartlett. 1999. A Field Guide to Texas Reptiles and Amphibians. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company. xviii + 331 pp.

Crother, B. I. (ed.). 2008. Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico, pp. 1–84. SSAR Herpetological Circular 37.

Elliott, L., Gerhardt, C., and C. Davidson. 2009. The Frogs and Toads of North America. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 343 pp. + CD.

Dixon, J.R. 2000. Amphibians and reptiles of Texas. (2nd edition). Col- lege Station: Texas A&M Press, 421 pp.

Dixon, J.R. and J.E. Werler. 2005. Texas Snakes: A Field Guide. Austin: University of Texas Press. xviii + 364 pp.

Price, A.H. 2009. Venomous Snakes of Texas: A Field Guide. Austin: University of Texas Press. xii + 116 pp. SWCHR CODE OF ETHICS

As a member of the Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research, I subscribe to the Association’s Code of Ethics.

Field activities should limit the impact on natural habitats, replacing all cover objects, not tearing apart rocks or logs and refraining from the use of gasoline or other toxic materials.

Catch and release coupled with photography and the limited take of non-protected species for personal study or breeding use is permitted. The commercial take and sale of wild-caught animals is not acceptable.

Collecting practices should respect landowner rights, including but not limited to securing permission for land entry and the packing out of all personal trash.

Captive-breeding efforts are recognized as a valid means of potentially reducing collection pressures on wild populations and are encouraged.

The release of captive animals including captive-bred animals into the wild is discouraged except under the supervision of trained professionals and in accordance with an accepted species preservation or restocking plan.

The disclosure of exact locality information on public internet forums is discouraged in most circumstances. Locality information posted on public internet forums usually should be restricted to providing the name of the county where the animal was found. When specific locality data is provided ot one in confidence, it should be keptin confidence and should not be abused or shared with others without explicit permission.

Other members of the Association are always to be treated cordially and in a respectful manner.

SWCHR PO BOX 624 SEGUIN TX 78156