DOCSLIB.ORG

Distribution and Calling Phenology of Generalist Frog Species Along a Climate Gradient

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Distribution and Calling Phenology of Generalist Frog Species Along a Climate Gradient Distribution and calling phenology of generalist frog species along a climate gradient Amelia Walcott A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Charles Sturt University Faculty of Science School of Environmental Sciences Albury, NSW 2640 Australia January 2017 i ii iii iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... x List of Tables....................................................................................................................................... xiii List of Plates ........................................................................................................................................ xiv Certificate of Authorship ................................................................................................................ xv Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... xvii Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ xix Chapter 1 General introduction: Environmental drivers of amphibian distribution and resource use in modified temperate ecosystems ........................................................... 1 1.1 Wetland and amphibian decline ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 Frog occupancy and breeding patterns .......................................................................... 2 1.3 Hydrological modification .................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Climate change implications for frogs ............................................................................. 5 1.5 This research ............................................................................................................................. 8 1.6 Comments on thesis structure ........................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2 Study area description: environmental context of the mid to upper Lachlan ................................................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.2 Climate ....................................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.1 Temperature & rainfall during this study............................................................ 13 2.3 Land use .................................................................................................................................... 14 2.4 Habitat modification ............................................................................................................. 16 2.5 Geomorphology ...................................................................................................................... 16 2.6 Fluvial characteristics .......................................................................................................... 18 2.7 Soils ............................................................................................................................................. 18 2.8 Vegetation................................................................................................................................. 19 v 2.9 Regulation of the Lachlan River ...................................................................................... 20 2.10 Climate variability, water governance & climate change ................................... 21 Chapter 3 Broad scale patterns & detectability of frog communities in the mid to upper Lachlan ..................................................................................................................................... 23 3.1 Introduction: Frog species in the Lachlan catchment ............................................. 23 3.2 Methods .................................................................................................................................... 24 3.2.1 Site selection strategy ................................................................................................. 24 3.2.2 Overview of the selected sites ................................................................................. 25 3.2.3 Survey design ................................................................................................................. 26 3.2.4 Field survey techniques ............................................................................................. 26 3.2.5 Frog surveys ................................................................................................................... 28 3.3 Data analysis ........................................................................................................................... 29 3.3.1 Detection probability .................................................................................................. 29 3.3.2 Atlas of NSW Wildlife .................................................................................................. 30 3.4 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 30 3.4.1 General distribution of frog species ...................................................................... 30 3.4.2 Comparison with Atlas data ..................................................................................... 31 3.5 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 17 3.5.1 General patterns of occupancy ................................................................................ 17 3.5.2 Potentially false positive Atlas records ................................................................ 18 3.5.3 Non-detection of heavy rain responders ............................................................. 19 3.5.4 Rarely encountered species ...................................................................................... 19 3.5.5 Endangered, previously sympatric species ........................................................ 19 3.5.6 Unclassified species ..................................................................................................... 21 3.5.7 Species detectability .................................................................................................... 22 3.5.8 Other studies .................................................................................................................. 23 3.6 Conclusion................................................................................................................................ 26 vi Chapter 4 Local-scale habitat characteristics predict frog occupancy in the mid to upper Lachlan ..................................................................................................................................... 27 4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 27 4.1.1 Local waterbody-scale habitat factors .................................................................. 28 4.1.2 Landscape-scale habitat factors .............................................................................. 31 4.1.3 This study ......................................................................................................................... 32 4.2 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 32 4.2.1 Environmental variables ............................................................................................ 32 4.2.2 Data reduction ................................................................................................................ 33 4.2.3 Statistical analysis ......................................................................................................... 36 4.3 Results....................................................................................................................................... 38 4.3.1 Model selection .............................................................................................................. 38 4.3.2 Species habitat associations ...................................................................................... 39 4.4 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 49 4.4.1 Site climate history ....................................................................................................... 49 4.4.2 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................ 50 4.4.3 Water quality .................................................................................................................. 51 4.4.4 Grazing intensity ........................................................................................................... 51 4.4.5 Landscape connectivity .............................................................................................
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]
  • Toxicity of Glyphosate on Physalaemus Albonotatus (Steindachner, 1864) from Western Brazil
    Ecotoxicol. Environ. Contam., v. 8, n. 1, 2013, 55-58 doi: 10.5132/eec.2013.01.008 Toxicity of Glyphosate on Physalaemus albonotatus (Steindachner, 1864) from Western Brazil F. SIMIONI 1, D.F.N. D A SILVA 2 & T. MO tt 3 1 Laboratório de Herpetologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil. 2 Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação da Biodiversidade, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil. 3 Setor de Biodiversidade e Ecologia, Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Av. Lourival Melo Mota, s/n, Maceió, Alagoas, CEP 57072-970, Brazil. (Received April 12, 2012; Accept April 05, 2013) Abstract Amphibian declines have been reported worldwide and pesticides can negatively impact this taxonomic group. Brazil is the world’s largest consumer of pesticides, and Mato Grosso is the leader in pesticide consumption among Brazilian states. However, the effects of these chemicals on the biota are still poorly explored. The main goals of this study were to determine the acute toxicity (CL50) of the herbicide glyphosate on Physalaemus albonotatus, and to assess survivorship rates when tadpoles are kept under sub-lethal concentrations. Three egg masses of P. albonotatus were collected in Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil. Tadpoles were exposed for 96 h to varying concentrations of glyphosate to determine the CL50 and survivorship. The -1 CL50 was 5.38 mg L and there were statistically significant differences in mortality rates and the number of days that P. albonotatus tadpoles survived when exposed in different sub-lethal concentrations of glyphosate. Different sensibilities among amphibian species may be related with their historical contact with pesticides and/or specific tolerances.
    [Show full text]
  • An Insectivorous Australian Pratincole Stiltia Isabella Diversifies Its Diet
    Northern Territory Naturalist (2013) 24: 61–64 Short Note An insectivorous Australian Pratincole Stiltia isabella diversifies its diet Peter M. Kyne1 and Micha V. Jackson2 1 Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin NT 0909, Australia. Email: [email protected] 2 North Australian Indigenous Land and Sea Management Alliance Limited, Charles Darwin University, Darwin NT 0909, Australia. Abstract Pratincoles and coursers (family Glareolidae), including the primarily ground-feeding Australian Pratincole Stiltia isabella, are principally insectivorous. This paper presents a brief note on the first documented occurrence of Australian Pratincole (and indeed a rare record of any glareolid bird) feeding on vertebrate prey, in this case a small frog. The family Glareolidae is made up of two distinct sub-families, the coursers (Cursoriinae) and the pratincoles (Glareolinae), both of which are principally insectivorous (del Hoyo et al. 1996; Higgins & Davies 1996). Coursers are mostly ground feeders while pratincoles are mostly aerial feeders; the exception is the Australian Pratincole Stiltia isabella (the sole member of its genus), which forms a link between the two groups and is the only pratincole to feed primarily on the ground (Maclean 1976; del Hoyo et al. 1996). Stomach contents and feeding records indicate that a diversity of insects constitute the species’ diet, with additional prey items including centipedes (Myriapoda) and spiders (Arachnida) (Maclean 1976; Barker & Vestjens 1989; Higgins & Davies 1996). While del Hoyo et al. (1996) state that glareorids will sometimes take small lizards, they do not indicate the group or species for which this has been recorded. Here we present a brief note on the first documented occurrence of Australian Pratincole (and indeed a rare record of any glareolid bird) feeding on vertebrate prey.
    [Show full text]
  • North Central Waterwatch Frogs Field Guide
    North Central Waterwatch Frogs Field Guide “This guide is an excellent publication. It strikes just the right balance, providing enough information in a format that is easy to use for identifying our locally occurring frogs, while still being attractive and interesting to read by people of all ages.” Rodney Orr, Bendigo Field Naturalists Club Inc. 1 The North Central CMA Region Swan Hill River Murray Kerang Cohuna Quambatook Loddon River Pyramid Hill Wycheproof Boort Loddon/Campaspe Echuca Watchem Irrigation Area Charlton Mitiamo Donald Rochester Avoca River Serpentine Avoca/Avon-Richardson Wedderburn Elmore Catchment Area Richardson River Bridgewater Campaspe River St Arnaud Marnoo Huntly Bendigo Avon River Bealiba Dunolly Loddon/Campaspe Dryland Area Heathcote Maryborough Castlemaine Avoca Loddon River Kyneton Lexton Clunes Daylesford Woodend Creswick Acknowledgement Of Country The North Central Catchment Management Authority (CMA) acknowledges Aboriginal Traditional Owners within the North Central CMA region, their rich culture and their spiritual connection to Country. We also recognise and acknowledge the contribution and interests of Aboriginal people and organisations in the management of land and natural resources. Acknowledgements North Central Waterwatch would like to acknowledge the contribution and support from the following organisations and individuals during the development of this publication: Britt Gregory from North Central CMA for her invaluable efforts in the production of this document, Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority for allowing use of their draft field guide, Lydia Fucsko, Adrian Martins, David Kleinert, Leigh Mitchell, Peter Robertson and Nick Layne for use of their wonderful photos and Mallee Catchment Management Authority for their design support and a special thanks to Ray Draper for his support and guidance in the development of the Frogs Field Guide 2012.
    [Show full text]
  • First Report of Gastrointestinal Helminths from the Wokan Cannibal Frog, Lechriodus Melanopyga (Amphibia: Limnodynastidae), from Papua New Guinea1
    First Report of Gastrointestinal Helminths from the Wokan Cannibal Frog, Lechriodus melanopyga (Amphibia: Limnodynastidae), from Papua New Guinea1 Stephen R. Goldberg,2 Charles R. Bursey,3 and Fred Kraus4 Abstract: The initial gastrointestinal helminth list is established for Lechriodus melanopyga (Doria) from Papua New Guinea. Examination of the digestive tracts of 16 L. melanopyga from April–May (n ¼ 14) and October (n ¼ 2) re- vealed six helminth species: Digenea: Mesocoelium monas; Nematoda: Aplectana macintoshii, Cosmocerca novaeguineae, Oswaldocruzia bakeri, Abbreviata sp. (larvae in cysts); Acanthocephala: Acanthocephalus bufonis. Cosmocerca novaeguineae was present in the greatest numbers (171) and shared the highest prevalence (88%) with Acanthocephalus bufonis. Lechriodus melanopyga represents a new host record for each of these helminths. New Guinea is a new locality record for Mesocoe- lium monas and Acanthocephalus bufonis. The family Limnodynastidae consists of materials and methods eight genera with over 40 species, of which Limnodynastes and Lechriodus occur in both Sixteen Lechriodus melanopyga (mean snout- Australia and New Guinea; all other genera vent length, 50.0 G 2.46 SD; range, 46.6– are restricted to Australia (Zug et al. 2001, 56.0 mm) were collected by hand by F.K. Frost et al. 2006). The Wokan cannibal frog, from 29 April to 2 May 2002 and 5 October Lechriodus melanopyga (Doria) is a medium- 2002 at Duabo, 10.4184333 S, 150.3068333 sized, dull brown frog rarely more than 50 E (WGS 84 datum), 300 m, Pini Range, mm long that ranges across New Guinea Milne Bay, Papua New Guinea. Frogs were (Zweifel 1972, Gu¨nther 2003) and breeds in fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin and shallow forest swamps and puddles (Menzies preserved in 70% ethanol.
    [Show full text]
  • GBMWHA Native Amphibians Courtesy of Judy and Peter Smith - V3 Frogs NSW Comm
    Blue Mountains Nature GBMWHA Native Amphibians Courtesy of Judy and Peter Smith - V3 frogs NSW Comm. Family Scientific Name Common Name status status Hylidae Litoria aurea Green and Golden Bell Frog E V Hylidae Litoria booroolongensis Booroolong Frog E E Hylidae Litoria caerulea Green Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria chloris Red-eyed Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria citropa Blue Mountains Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria dentata Bleating Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria ewingii Brown Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria fallax Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria latopalmata Broad-palmed Frog Hylidae Litoria lesueuri Lesueur's Frog Hylidae Litoria littlejohni Littlejohn's Tree Frog V V Hylidae Litoria nudidigita Leaf Green River Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria peronii Peron's Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria phyllochroa Leaf-green Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria tyleri Tyler's Tree Frog Hylidae Litoria verreauxii Verreaux's Frog Hylidae Litoria wilcoxi Wilcox's Frog Limnodynastidae Adelotus brevis Tusked Frog Limnodynastidae Heleioporus australiacus Giant Burrowing Frog V V Limnodynastidae Lechriodus fletcheri Fletcher's Frog Limnodynastidae Limnodynastes dumerilii Eastern Banjo Frog Limnodynastidae Limnodynastes peronii Brown-striped Frog Limnodynastidae Limnodynastes tasmaniensis Spotted Grass Frog Limnodynastidae Neobatrachus sudelli Sudell's Frog Limnodynastidae Platyplectrum ornatum Ornate Burrowing Frog Myobatrachidae Crinia signifera Common Eastern Froglet Myobatrachidae Mixophyes balbus Stuttering Frog E V Myobatrachidae Mixophyes fasciolatus Great Barred Frog Myobatrachidae Mixophyes iteratus Giant Barred Frog E E Myobatrachidae Paracrinia haswelli Haswell's Froglet Myobatrachidae Pseudophryne australis Red-crowned Toadlet V Myobatrachidae Pseudophryne bibronii Brown Toadlet Myobatrachidae Uperoleia fusca Dusky Toadlet Myobatrachidae Uperoleia laevigata Smooth Toadlet Myobatrachidae Uperoleia tyleri Tyler's Toadlet NSW/Comm. status: C - Critical, E - Endangered, V- Vulnerable page 1 of 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Predation by Introduced Cats Felis Catus on Australian Frogs: Compilation of Species Records and Estimation of Numbers Killed
    Predation by introduced cats Felis catus on Australian frogs: compilation of species records and estimation of numbers killed J. C. Z. WoinarskiA,M, S. M. LeggeB,C, L. A. WoolleyA,L, R. PalmerD, C. R. DickmanE, J. AugusteynF, T. S. DohertyG, G. EdwardsH, H. GeyleA, H. McGregorI, J. RileyJ, J. TurpinK and B. P. MurphyA ANESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia. BNESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Research, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia. CFenner School of the Environment and Society, Linnaeus Way, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2602, Australia. DWestern Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Bentley, WA 6983, Australia. ENESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Desert Ecology Research Group, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. FQueensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Red Hill, Qld 4701, Australia. GCentre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences (Burwood campus), Deakin University, Geelong, Vic. 3216, Australia. HNorthern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, PO Box 1120, Alice Springs, NT 0871, Australia. INESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia. JSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, United Kingdom. KDepartment of Terrestrial Zoology, Western Australian Museum, 49 Kew Street, Welshpool, WA 6106, Australia. LPresent address: WWF-Australia, 3 Broome Lotteries House, Cable Beach Road, Broome, WA 6276, Australia. MCorresponding author. Email: [email protected] Table S1. Data sources used in compilation of cat predation on frogs.
    [Show full text]
  • ARAZPA YOTF Infopack.Pdf
    ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Information pack ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Printing: The ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign pack was generously supported by Madman Printing Phone: +61 3 9244 0100 Email: [email protected] Front cover design: Patrick Crawley, www.creepycrawleycartoons.com Mobile: 0401 316 827 Email: [email protected] Front cover photo: Pseudophryne pengilleyi, Northern Corroboree Frog. Photo courtesy of Lydia Fucsko. Printed on 100% recycled stock 2 ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Contents Foreword.........................................................................................................................................5 Foreword part II ………………………………………………………………………………………… ...6 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................9 Section 1: Why A Campaign?....................................................................................................11 The Connection Between Man and Nature........................................................................11 Man’s Effect on Nature ......................................................................................................11 Frogs Matter ......................................................................................................................11 The Problem ......................................................................................................................12 The Reason
    [Show full text]
  • Amphibia: Anura: Limnodynastidae, Myobatrachidae, Pelodryadidae) in the Collection of the Western Australian Museum Ryan J
    RECORDS OF THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM 32 001–028 (2017) DOI: 10.18195/issn.0312-3162.32(1).2017.001-028 An annotated type catalogue of the frogs (Amphibia: Anura: Limnodynastidae, Myobatrachidae, Pelodryadidae) in the collection of the Western Australian Museum Ryan J. Ellis1*, Paul Doughty1 and J. Dale Roberts2 1 Department of Terrestrial Zoology, Western Australian Museum, 49 Kew Street, Welshpool, Western Australia 6106, Australia. 2 Centre of Excellence in Natural Resource Management, University of Western Australia, PO Box 5771, Albany, Western Australia 6332, Australia. * Corresponding author: [email protected] ABSTRACT – An annotated catalogue is provided for all primary and secondary type specimens of frogs (Amphibia: Anura) currently and previously held in the herpetological collection of the Western Australian Museum (WAM). The collection includes a total of 613 type specimens (excluding specimens maintained as possible paratypes) representing 55 species or subspecies of which four are currently considered junior synonyms of other species. The collection includes 44 holotypes, 3 lectotypes, 36 syntypes, 462 paratypes and 68 paralectotypes. In addition, the collection includes 392 specimens considered possible paratypes where paratype specimens could not be confrmed against specimens held in the WAM for fve species (Heleioporus barycragus, H. inornatus, H. psammophilus, Crinia pseudinsignifera and C. subinsignifera). There are 23 type specimens and seven possible paratypes that have not been located, some of which were part of historic disposal of specimens, and others with no records of disposal, loan or gifting and are therefore considered lost. Type specimens supposedly deposited in the WAM by Harrison of the Macleay Museum, University of Sydney, for Crinia rosea and Pseudophryne nichollsi were not located during the audit of types and are considered lost.
    [Show full text]
  • Supporting Information Tables
    Mapping the Global Emergence of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, the Amphibian Chytrid Fungus Deanna H. Olson, David M. Aanensen, Kathryn L. Ronnenberg, Christopher I. Powell, Susan F. Walker, Jon Bielby, Trenton W. J. Garner, George Weaver, the Bd Mapping Group, and Matthew C. Fisher Supplemental Information Taxonomic Notes Genera were assigned to families for summarization (Table 1 in main text) and analysis (Table 2 in main text) based on the most recent available comprehensive taxonomic references (Frost et al. 2006, Frost 2008, Frost 2009, Frost 2011). We chose recent family designations to explore patterns of Bd susceptibility and occurrence because these classifications were based on both genetic and morphological data, and hence may more likely yield meaningful inference. Some North American species were assigned to genus according to Crother (2008), and dendrobatid frogs were assigned to family and genus based on Grant et al. (2006). Eleutherodactylid frogs were assigned to family and genus based on Hedges et al. (2008); centrolenid frogs based on Cisneros-Heredia et al. (2007). For the eleutherodactylid frogs of Central and South America and the Caribbean, older sources count them among the Leptodactylidae, whereas Frost et al. (2006) put them in the family Brachycephalidae. More recent work (Heinicke et al. 2007) suggests that most of the genera that were once “Eleutherodactylus” (including those species currently assigned to the genera Eleutherodactylus, Craugastor, Euhyas, Phrynopus, and Pristimantis and assorted others), may belong in a separate, or even several different new families. Subsequent work (Hedges et al. 2008) has divided them among three families, the Craugastoridae, the Eleutherodactylidae, and the Strabomantidae, which were used in our classification.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Burrowing Frog)
    Consultation Document on Listing Eligibility and Conservation Actions Heleioporus australiacus (Giant Burrowing Frog) Heleioporus australiacus (Image: D. Hunter, NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment) You are invited to provide your views and supporting reasons related to: 1) the eligibility of Heleioporus australiacus (Giant Burrowing Frog) for inclusion on the EPBC Act threatened species list in the Endangered category; and 2) the necessary conservation actions for the above species. Evidence provided by experts, stakeholders and the general public are welcome. Responses can be provided by any interested person. Anyone may nominate a native species, ecological community or threatening process for listing under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) or for a transfer of an item already on the list to a new listing category. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee (the Committee) undertakes the assessment of species to determine eligibility for inclusion in the list of threatened species and provides its recommendation to the Australian Government Minister for the Environment. Responses are to be provided in writing either by email to: [email protected] or by mail to: Heleioporus australiacus (Giant Burrowing Frog) consultation document Page 1 of 33 The Director Marine and Freshwater Species Conservation Section Biodiversity Conservation Division Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment PO Box 858 Canberra ACT 2601 Responses are required to be submitted
    [Show full text]
  • Frogs in the Lachlan Catchment a Little About Me
    27/08/2014 Frogs in the Lachlan Catchment A little about me • Bachelor of Animal Science (Honours) CSU Wagga Wagga • PhD Environmental Science CSU Albury Wodonga • Research Assistant with CSU • Lachlan and Murrumbidgee rivers Carmen Amos – Charles Sturt University March 2013 How do you survey frogs? Diagram of surveys • Observation- Spotlighting at night • Call surveys • Sweeps during the day- Tadpoles • Vegetation surveys • Water quality Black Lines = Vegetation Transects • Hydrology Orange line = Prospective Spotlight transect Red Dots = Water Quality Measurements Green Line = Tadpole sweep area 1 27/08/2014 Perons tree frog Southern bell frog Terrestrial frogs & froglets Tree frogs Eastern sign-bearing froglet Spotted marsh frog Desert tree frog Eastern common froglet Photo credit: Jo Ocock Barking marsh frog Booroolong frog Sloanes froglet Green tree frog Burrowing frogs Booroolong frog Giant banjo frog Eastern banjo frog -Listed as endangered under NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1999 -Listed as endangered under the Environment Protections and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC) (National) Photo credit: Adrian Clements -Medium size tree frog -40mm Males Booroolong frog -55mm Females Photo by Pavel German -Historically recorded in Central Tablelands, but now rare Breeding -Seasonal breeders- Spring early summer -Eggs laid in submerged rock crevices Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013). Litoria booroolongensis in Species Profile and Threats -Tadpoles develop in slow flowing
    [Show full text]