By the Ornate Burrowing Frog Platyplectrum Ornatum (Gray, 1842)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

By the Ornate Burrowing Frog Platyplectrum Ornatum (Gray, 1842) Herpetology Notes, volume 8: 281-285 (2015) (published online on 18 May 2015) On the ant trail: “blitz-feeding” by the Ornate Burrowing Frog Platyplectrum ornatum (Gray, 1842) Matthew Mo Abstract. Little is known about the behaviour of many of Australia’s amphibians. In this paper, I report a series of incidental observations documenting “blitz-feeding” on ants and other arthropods by Ornate Burrowing Frogs (Platyplectrum ornatum) in the Pilliga forests and Bundarra, northern New South Wales, Australia. During these observations, frogs appeared to be strategically positioned on ant trails, crossing paths with 5–15 ants per minute. Frogs appeared to use their bodies to direct incoming ants towards their head. Blitz attacks were rapid, involving a volatile downward burst of the tongue. Similar behaviour has been confirmed in some Australian insectivorous lizards. Keywords. Australia, feeding strategy, insectivore, Limnodynastidae, Platyplectrum ornatum. Introduction be relatively small and cryptic (White, 1993), allowing them to become aware of the presence of observers Behaviours of Australian amphibians are generally before they can be observed undisturbed. poorly known. A substantial body of work on frog Platyplectrum ornatum (Limnodynastidae) is a ecology in Australia has focused on habitat selection, medium-sized foam-nesting frog (maximum SVL vocalisation, breeding, parasitology, and conservation 45 mm) found in northern and northeastern Australia status (e.g., Hazell, 2003; Goldingay and Newell, (Tyler and Knight, 2011; Cogger, 2014). A habitat 2005; Baker and Lauck, 2006; Daly and Craven, 2007; generalist, populations occur from a range of coastal Lemckert and Mahony, 2008; Lettoof et al., 2013). vegetation types to arid woodland in the drier interior Natural behaviour is difficult to directly observe in (Robinson, 1998). Distribution into dry environs frogs for a number of reasons. Most frogs are nocturnal is possible by retreating below ground in a state of and must be located at night by spotlighting; hence aestivation until adequate moisture becomes available the animals are disturbed at the time of detection. (Elkan, 1976; Withers, 1995). Platyplectrum ornatum Furthermore, frogs often retreat quickly or become apparently specialise in breeding in ephemeral pools motionless when approached, both responses that (Anstis, 2013; Kern et al., 2014). Ex-situ studies show doubtlessly alter natural behaviours. Even for frogs that its tadpoles readily prey on the eggs and tadpoles active and observable during the day, individuals may of other frogs (Crossland, 2000). Little more is known of its behaviour. This paper reports on observations of “blitz-feeding” on ants (order Hymenoptera) and other arthropods by P. platyplectrum recorded in the Pilliga forests and Bundarra in northern New South Wales Forest Science Centre, New South Wales Department of (NSW). Primary Industries, PO Box 242, Parramatta, New South Wales 2151, Australia Methods Current address: State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Woodbridge The Pilliga forests (30.83° S, 149.31° E) are the Road, Menangle, New South Wales 2568, Australia. Email: largest remaining continuous native forest section in [email protected] NSW west of the Great Dividing Range (Milledge, 282 Matthew Mo 2012). Two broad geological sections occur: flat, sandy outwash in the northwestern corner of the region and low rocky hills in the remainder. Typical vegetation is an association of White Cypress Pine (Callitris glaucophylla), Bull-oak (Allocasuarina luehmannii), and several Eucalyptus species, such as Blakely’s Red Gum (E. blakelyi), Narrow-leafed Ironbark (E. crebra), Pilliga Box (E. pilligaensis), and Poplar Box (E. populnea). The forests are a matrix of national parks and state forests, managed by the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service and the Forestry Corporation of NSW, respectively. An extensive network of unsealed Figure 1. Video footage still showing an ant (arrow) roads provides easy public access. I visited the Pilliga moving close to the anterior of an Ornate Burrowing Frog forests during four one-week fieldtrips over a two-year (Platyplectrum ornatum), seconds before a feeding blitz. period. There was substantial rainfall prior to the first Notice the large eyes that bulge outward beyond the lips, visit in October 2012, and scattered precipitation prior to enabling the frog to see potential prey moving directly below two visits in November 2012 and March 2013. A fourth its head. visit was carried out in April 2014, after a severely dry summer. Bundarra (30.1667° S, 151.0667° E) is a small town located on the Great Dividing Range, 82 km northwest of Armidale and 130 km east of the Pilliga forests. Two three-day visits were conducted in January and June 2014. Frogs were encountered on private property and the Bundarra Cemetery. The terrain was a matrix of cleared paddock and open woodland dominated by Narrow- leafed Ironbark, New England Blackbutt (Eucalyptus andrewsii), and Roundleaf Gum (E. deanei). Platyplectrum ornatum were incidentally encountered on the roads at night. Their round body shape was relatively easy to detect by a focused observer in vehicle headlights. Spotlighting from a vehicle is a well- practiced method for locating terrestrial herpetofauna (Bishop et al., 1997; Kerr and Bull, 2004; Penman et Figure 2. Video footage still showing an Ornate Burrowing al., 2008). When a frog was located, the vehicle was Frog (Platyplectrum ornatum) lapping up its prey. stopped as far a distance as possible and observations were conducted using the headlights of the vehicle. Each time, the frog was located on an ant trail. In ten observations, the number of ants approaching within 5 cm of the frog’s anterior per minute was counted. Ten prey captures (between three individual Results frogs) were successfully timed with a stopwatch. For one A total of 32 and 23 P. ornatum were located on frog, feeding behaviour was recorded via photography. roads in the Pilliga forests and Bundarra, respectively. Obtaining images through still photography was Platyplectrum ornatum became motionless when extremely difficult due to the volatile action of the approached, sometimes tucking their limbs and feeding blitz. Failing this, the camera (Pentax Optio snouts against their bodies to reduce conspicuity. This WG-1) was set to video mode and placed in front of stationary response is similar to that observed in Eastern the frog. Frame rate was preset to 30 frames per second. Banjo Frogs (Limnodynastes dumerilii) and Sudell’s Still images were extracted during playback for this Frogs (Neobatrachus sudelli), which were also located paper (Figs. 1, 2). (Mo, 2014; Mo, unpubl. data). This was unlike the anti- On the ant trail: “blitz-feeding” by the Ornate Burrowing Frog 283 approached within 5 cm of the frogs’ anterior per minute (n = 10). Approaching ants followed the frog’s outline toward either the posterior or anterior (Fig. 1). Prey capture was apparently triggered by ants passing the front of the frog; carried out rapidly by a volatile downward burst of the tongue (Fig. 2). The time period taken to capture ants ranged between 0.3 and 0.5 seconds. Besides buccal pumping, no movement of the head was required prior to the capture. Large eyes that bulge out of the body appear to give P. ornatum the ability to sight prey that is immediately below its mouth. When capturing ants directly in front, a frog’s head movement was limited to lowering the lower jaw for protrusion of the tongue. When ants were positioned to the left or right of the head, the feeding blitz included a tilt of the head at the corresponding angle. This shows that frogs were targeting prey rather than striking opportunistically. As shown in Fig. 2, this behaviour involved a head tilt toward the right-hand side. All feeding blitzes observed resulted in the capture of prey, so that the feeding success rate was 100%. There did not appear to be any defensive actions or avoidance behaviours displayed by the ants. Apart from ants, there were two isolated observations of a wolf spider (family Lycosidae) and dragonfly (order Odonata) being consumed. The spider strayed close to a frog’s head (Fig. 3), prompting a feeding blitz. The capture occurred at a much slower speed than the actions described above. This enabled a series of still photographs to be recorded. These show that the spider was apparently stunned by the rapid onset of the feeding blitz before being consumed in at least four gulps. Similarly, the dragonfly, which hovered close to the frog, was maneuvered inside the mouth by a number of gulps. It landed near the frog’s head and was initially Figure 3. “Blitz-feeding” by an Ornate Burrowing Frog captured by the wing (Fig. 4). (Platyplectrum ornatum) on a Wolf Spider (family Lycosidae). Discussion Strategic positioning on ant trails is a known behaviour in other insectivorous herpetofauna, such the Thorny Devil, Moloch horridus (Pianka and Pianka, 1970; Clemente et al., 2004), Western Bearded Dragons, predator strategies of most other frogs seen, including Pogona minor (Thompson and Thompson, 2003), and Spotted Grass Frogs (Limnodynastes tasmaniensis), legless lizards, genus Aprasia (Webb and Shine, 1994). Desert Tree Frogs (Litoria rubella), or Broad-palmed While a single ant does not provide much nourishment, Rocket Frogs (L. latopalmata), which often hopped ants are abundant in inland Australia (Abensperg-Traun away. and Steven, 1997). By positioning itself in front of When located, P. ornatum appeared to be strategically an ant trail, a frog can eventually gather a substantial positioned on ant trails. Between five and 15 ants quantity over a period of time. 284 Matthew Mo comments by Hinrich Kaiser and an anonymous reviewer improved the manuscript. References Abensperg-Traun, M., Steven, D. (1997): Ant- and termite-eating in Australian mammals and lizards: a comparison. Australian Journal of Ecology 22: 9-17. Anstis, M. (2013): Tadpoles and Frogs of Australia. Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, New Holland Publishers.
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]
  • Environment and Communications Legislation Committee Answers to Questions on Notice Environment Portfolio
    Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications Legislation Committee Answers to questions on notice Environment portfolio Question No: 3 Hearing: Additional Estimates Outcome: Outcome 1 Programme: Biodiversity Conservation Division (BCD) Topic: Threatened Species Commissioner Hansard Page: N/A Question Date: 24 February 2016 Question Type: Written Senator Waters asked: The department has noted that more than $131 million has been committed to projects in support of threatened species – identifying 273 Green Army Projects, 88 20 Million Trees projects, 92 Landcare Grants (http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/3be28db4-0b66-4aef-9991- 2a2f83d4ab22/files/tsc-report-dec2015.pdf) 1. Can the department provide an itemised list of these projects, including title, location, description and amount funded? Answer: Please refer to below table for itemised lists of projects addressing threatened species outcomes, including title, location, description and amount funded. INFORMATION ON PROJECTS WITH THREATENED SPECIES OUTCOMES The following projects were identified by the funding applicant as having threatened species outcomes and were assessed against the criteria for the respective programme round. Funding is for a broad range of activities, not only threatened species conservation activities. Figures provided for the Green Army are approximate and are calculated on the 2015-16 indexed figure of $176,732. Some of the funding is provided in partnership with State & Territory Governments. Additional projects may be approved under the Natinoal Environmental Science programme and the Nest to Ocean turtle Protection Programme up to the value of the programme allocation These project lists reflect projects and funding originally approved. Not all projects will proceed to completion.
    [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]
  • 20 Th ANNIVERSARY ISSUE!
    FROGCALL NEWSLETTER No. 116 No 146, December 2016 20 th ANNIVERSARY ISSUE! David Nelson Tassie Trifecta Arthur White Green Tree Frog Story Marion Anstis Native tadpole or cane toad? Harry Hines Kroombit Tinker-frog THE FROG AND TADPOLE STUDY GROUP NSW Inc. andFacebook: more..... https://www.facebook.com/groups/FATSNSW/ Email: [email protected] Frogwatch Helpline 0419 249 728 Website: www.fats.org.au ABN: 34 282 154 794 MEETING FORMAT Friday 2nd December 2016 6.30 pm: Lost frogs needing homes. Please bring your FATS membership card and $$ donation. NPWS NSW, Office of Environment and Heritage amphibian licence must be sighted on the night. Rescued frogs can never be released. 7.00 pm: Welcome and announcements. 7.45 pm: The main speaker is Marion Anstis, for a change giving us a look at a ‘no frog zone’ in a very cold part of the world! 8.30 pm: Frog-O-Graphic Competition Prizes Awarded. 8.45 pm: Show us your frog images, tell us about your frogging trips or experiences. Guessing competi- tion, continue with frog adoptions, Christmas supper and a chance to relax and chat with frog experts. Thanks to all speakers for an enjoyable year of meetings, and all entrants in the Frog-O-Graphic Competition. Email [email protected] to send an article for FrogCall. CONTENTS President’s Page Arthur White 3 The Story of FATS - 25th Anniversary Arthur White 4 Our Remarkable Neobatrachus Stephen Mahony 12 Veterinary Observations on a Captive Green Tree Frog Dr Kim Le 14 Centre Poster Spread: Splendid Tree Frogs Karen Russell 16 FATS Frog-O-Graphic Competition winners 18 Eyes Bigger than their Bellies! Dr Shane Simpson 20 Meet the New Species Marion Anstis 23 Smiths Lake Field Trip, March 2016 Peter Spradbrow 26 Field Trips Robert Wall 30 Meeting directions and map 31 Committee members contact details 32 Cover photo: Dahl’s Aquatic Frog, Litoria dahlii from Karumba, Qld Aaron Payne 2 President’s Page Arthur White 2015–2016 has been another good year for FATS.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology and Pathology of Amphibian Ranaviruses
    Vol. 87: 243–266, 2009 DISEASES OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS Published December 3 doi: 10.3354/dao02138 Dis Aquat Org OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS REVIEW Ecology and pathology of amphibian ranaviruses Matthew J. Gray1,*, Debra L. Miller1, 2, Jason T. Hoverman1 1274 Ellington Plant Sciences Building, Center for Wildlife Health, Department of Forestry Wildlife and Fisheries, Institute of Agriculture, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-4563, USA 2Veterinary Diagnostic and Investigational Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Georgia, 43 Brighton Road, Tifton, Georgia 31793, USA ABSTRACT: Mass mortality of amphibians has occurred globally since at least the early 1990s from viral pathogens that are members of the genus Ranavirus, family Iridoviridae. The pathogen infects multiple amphibian hosts, larval and adult cohorts, and may persist in herpetofaunal and oste- ichthyan reservoirs. Environmental persistence of ranavirus virions outside a host may be several weeks or longer in aquatic systems. Transmission occurs by indirect and direct routes, and includes exposure to contaminated water or soil, casual or direct contact with infected individuals, and inges- tion of infected tissue during predation, cannibalism, or necrophagy. Some gross lesions include swelling of the limbs or body, erythema, swollen friable livers, and hemorrhage. Susceptible amphi- bians usually die from chronic cell death in multiple organs, which can occur within a few days fol- lowing infection or may take several weeks. Amphibian species differ in their susceptibility to rana- viruses, which may be related to their co-evolutionary history with the pathogen. The occurrence of recent widespread amphibian population die-offs from ranaviruses may be an interaction of sup- pressed and naïve host immunity, anthropogenic stressors, and novel strain introduction.
    [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]
  • 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 .......................................................................................
    [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]
  • A Preliminary Risk Assessment of Cane Toads in Kakadu National Park Scientist Report 164, Supervising Scientist, Darwin NT
    supervising scientist 164 report A preliminary risk assessment of cane toads in Kakadu National Park RA van Dam, DJ Walden & GW Begg supervising scientist national centre for tropical wetland research This report has been prepared by staff of the Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist (eriss) as part of our commitment to the National Centre for Tropical Wetland Research Rick A van Dam Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist, Locked Bag 2, Jabiru NT 0886, Australia (Present address: Sinclair Knight Merz, 100 Christie St, St Leonards NSW 2065, Australia) David J Walden Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist, GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801, Australia George W Begg Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist, GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801, Australia This report should be cited as follows: van Dam RA, Walden DJ & Begg GW 2002 A preliminary risk assessment of cane toads in Kakadu National Park Scientist Report 164, Supervising Scientist, Darwin NT The Supervising Scientist is part of Environment Australia, the environmental program of the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage © Commonwealth of Australia 2002 Supervising Scientist Environment Australia GPO Box 461, Darwin NT 0801 Australia ISSN 1325-1554 ISBN 0 642 24370 0 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 Supervising Scientist Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction
    [Show full text]
  • Catalogue of Protozoan Parasites Recorded in Australia Peter J. O
    1 CATALOGUE OF PROTOZOAN PARASITES RECORDED IN AUSTRALIA PETER J. O’DONOGHUE & ROBERT D. ADLARD O’Donoghue, P.J. & Adlard, R.D. 2000 02 29: Catalogue of protozoan parasites recorded in Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 45(1):1-164. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Published reports of protozoan species from Australian animals have been compiled into a host- parasite checklist, a parasite-host checklist and a cross-referenced bibliography. Protozoa listed include parasites, commensals and symbionts but free-living species have been excluded. Over 590 protozoan species are listed including amoebae, flagellates, ciliates and ‘sporozoa’ (the latter comprising apicomplexans, microsporans, myxozoans, haplosporidians and paramyxeans). Organisms are recorded in association with some 520 hosts including mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. Information has been abstracted from over 1,270 scientific publications predating 1999 and all records include taxonomic authorities, synonyms, common names, sites of infection within hosts and geographic locations. Protozoa, parasite checklist, host checklist, bibliography, Australia. Peter J. O’Donoghue, Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia; Robert D. Adlard, Protozoa Section, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia; 31 January 2000. CONTENTS the literature for reports relevant to contemporary studies. Such problems could be avoided if all previous HOST-PARASITE CHECKLIST 5 records were consolidated into a single database. Most Mammals 5 researchers currently avail themselves of various Reptiles 21 electronic database and abstracting services but none Amphibians 26 include literature published earlier than 1985 and not all Birds 34 journal titles are covered in their databases. Fish 44 Invertebrates 54 Several catalogues of parasites in Australian PARASITE-HOST CHECKLIST 63 hosts have previously been published.
    [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]