A Taxonomic Study of the Genus Acris and the Status of Acris Crepitans Blanchardi (Harper), Blanchard's Cricket Frog, in Southern Ohio and Western West Virginia Amy M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Marshall University Marshall Digital Scholar Theses, Dissertations and Capstones 1-1-2008 A Taxonomic Study of the Genus Acris and the Status of Acris Crepitans Blanchardi (Harper), Blanchard's Cricket Frog, in Southern Ohio and Western West Virginia Amy M. Hamilton Follow this and additional works at: http://mds.marshall.edu/etd Part of the Animal Sciences Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Hamilton, Amy M., "A Taxonomic Study of the Genus Acris and the Status of Acris Crepitans Blanchardi (Harper), Blanchard's Cricket Frog, in Southern Ohio and Western West Virginia" (2008). Theses, Dissertations and Capstones. Paper 619. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Marshall Digital Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Marshall Digital Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A TAXONOMIC STUDY OF THE GENUS ACRIS AND THE STATUS OF ACRIS CREPITANS BLANCHARDI (HARPER), BLANCHARD’S CRICKET FROG, IN SOUTHERN OHIO AND WESTERN WEST VIRGINIA Thesis submitted to The Graduate College of Marshall University In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Science Program Marshall University Department of Biological Sciences Amy M. Hamilton Thomas K. Pauley, Advisor Dan K. Evans F. Robin O’Keefe Huntington, West Virginia April 2008 Key words: Acris crepitans blanchardi, cricket frog, amphibian declines, taxonomy, morphology, natural history, dissolved oxygen, pH, plant surveys “A TAXONOMIC STUDY OF THE GENUS ACRIS AND THE STATUS OF ACRIS CREPITANS BLANCHARDI (HARPER), BLANCHARD’S CRICKET FROG, IN SOUTHERN OHIO AND WESTERN WEST VIRGINIA” Amy M. Hamilton Distributions of Acris crepitans and Acris gryllus cover most of the eastern United States with some overlap, and the subspecies Acris crepitans blanchardi and Acris crepitans crepitans also occur sympathric in parts of their ranges. My study analyzed 15 morphological characteristics of A. c. blanchardi, A. c. crepitans, and A. g. gryllus using Canonical Discriminate Analysis. Results support current taxonomy, showing the most separation between A. crepitans and A. gryllus and some overlap between A. c. blanchardi and A. c. crepitans. Sexual dimorphism was seen only in A. c. blanchardi and A. c. crepitans with females being larger than males. Acris c. blanchardi (Blanchard’s Cricket Frog), is listed as a species of concern in Ohio and as possibly extirpated in West Virginia and is suffering declines throughout its range. Acidic conditions and habitat degradation are thought to contribute to A. c. blanchardi declines. I recorded number of A. c. blanchardi, dissolved oxygen, pH, and temperatures and conducted vascular plant surveys in Ohio and West Virginia. DO and pH differed significantly between sites with and without A. c. blanchardi. No apparent relationship was found between richness of flora and presence/absence of A. c. blanchardi. Habitat degradation of water with lower dissolved oxygen and higher pH appears be contributing more to A. c. blanchardi declines than richness of flora and total invasive species surrounding the water. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the Ohio Biological Survey and Marshall Graduate Committee for financial assistance. Collecting permits were obtained for Ohio, West Virginia, and Wayne National Forest. This project never would have been possible without the many generous people who have helped me along the way. I’d like to begin by thanking my advisor, Dr. Thomas K. Pauley, for all his good advice and wisdom throughout this experience, for his kindness and sense of humor, and, most of all, for his faith in me. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Dan Evans who not only pulled me out of the mud but also provided endless identification skills and support and Dr. O’Keefe who provided an endless stream of statistical advice. I am very grateful for their willingness to share their knowledge. A special thanks to Nancy (Dickson) Johnson for sharing a love for the “little clackers” and for providing some of her experiences, field sites, and a plethora of reading materials. Also thank you to Dr. Strait for providing me a job and help throughout this entire experience, Dr. Lehtinen and Grep Lipps, Kari Kirschbaum and Wayne National Forrest, Liz Fet for all her help, Pete Glass and Jim Spence for tons of GIS help, and finally, the herpetology lab for being such a great group of herpetologists and conservationists. A long list of people provided me help in the field even very late at night and in mucky, dirty pond water: Ben Hamilton, Jenny Richards, Shane Pendleton, Rob Colvin, Michael Brewer, Jennifer Felty, Heather Pauley, Connor Keitzer, Scott Albaugh, Emmy Johnson, Frank Piccinnini, Adam Hoople, and Officer Chris Gilkey. This study would not have been possible without all the kind landowners and organizations willing to collaborate with me. Thank you to both the Edge of Appalachian and Highlands Sanctuary for allowing me to do work on their property. Nancy Stranahan, Rich McCarty, Marc Zloba, John Howard, and Justin Ramsey all provided land for me to study on and information about ponds. Adam Hoople helped with numerous plant surveys for which I am very grateful. Randy Lakes especially helped me out providing land, boats, and a place to stay, in addition to being a very intelligent naturalist. John Howard is also a dedicated naturalist and provided not only his own property to study on but also escorted me around the GE facility. My parents have always been a huge support system for me and encouraged me to follow my dreams and achieve my goals even those involving frogs, bats, butterflies, or whatever my current passion may be. My brother, Bryan Hamilton, is a herpetologist I look up to and has inspired this passion with both patience and knowledge for which I am very grateful. My sister, Sarah Hamilton, is a wonderful listener and never fails to provide excellent input. And finally, my fiancé, Rob Colvin, was my main support throughout this graduate college experience. He never wavered in his belief in me. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES vii CHAPTER 1: AMPHIBIAN DECLINES 1 CHAPTER 2: A TAXONOMIC INVESTIGATION OF THE GENUS ACRIS Abstract 4 Introduction 4 Methods 6 Results 7 Discussion 9 CHAPTER 3: NATURAL HISTORY OF A. C. BLANCHARDI Abstract 11 Introduction 11 Methods 18 Results 20 Discussion 22 CHAPTER 4: PLANT SURVEYS ASSOCIATED WITH SELECTED PRESENCE/ABSENCE SITES Abstract 27 Introduction 27 Methods 28 Results 30 Discussion 31 LITERATURE CITED 33 iv LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. Taxonomic classification. 39 TABLE 2. Original description information for A. c. blanchardi. 39 TABLE 3. Original description information for A. c. crepitans. 40 TABLE 4. Original description information for A. gryllus. 40 TABLE 5. Characters measured. 41 TABLE 6. Mean values and standard deviations (std. dev.) for 15 characters of 6 groups analyzed in CDA. 41 TABLE 7. Raw Canonical Coefficients. Highest three values are shown in bold. 42 TABLE 8. List of Study Sites with location, dates visited, owner, and GPS co‐ordinates. 42 TABLE 9. Input variables of all combinations of water, soil, sun, and shade temperatures. 46 TABLE 10. Input variables of all combinations of water temperature, DO, pH and number of cricket frogs. 47 TABLE 11. Spearman coefficient and p values for correlations between DO, pH, water temperature, number of cricket frogs. 47 TABLE 12. List of presence of species at each site surveys. Presence is indicated with 1. 47 TABLE 13. Key to Table 12. 51 TABLE 14. Hidden Lake #2. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 52 TABLE 15. Hidden Lake #1. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 52 TABLE 16. Rhode’s Pond. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 52 v TABLE 17. Pond Lick Lake. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 53 TABLE 18. Church Pond. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 53 TABLE 19. Rt. 93 Pond. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 53 TABLE 20. Hanging Rock Lake 1. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 54 TABLE 21. Kamama Prairie Pond. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 54 TABLE 22. Forested Pond 2. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 55 TABLE 23. Riley Hollow Pond. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 55 TABLE 24. Rt. 650 Pond. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 55 TABLE 25. Near McCullough’s Pond. Dominance, relative dominance, frequency, relative frequency, and importance values of the species with the 10 highest importance values for herbs encountered in sampling. 56 TABLE 26. Floristic comparison of 12 sites.